Did the petitioner owe Rhode Island sales tax on a Bible under Regulation SU 92-136, and could the Tax Administrator decide the statute's constitutionality?

Plain-English summary

The petitioner was required to pay Rhode Island sales tax on the Bible purchase under Regulation SU 92-136. The Tax Administrator separately refused to decide whether the statutory exemption for Bibles and other canonized scriptures was unconstitutional, because constitutional questions were reserved to the courts.

The petitioner reported buying a Bible without tax. The request did not identify whether the purchase came before or after Regulation SU 92-136's January 1, 1993 effective date, where the purchase occurred, or provide a receipt or proof that tax was not paid.

Regulation SU 92-136 stated that the sale, storage, use, or consumption of Bibles and other canonized scriptures was taxable notwithstanding the exemption formerly numbered § 44-18-30(HH), later recodified as § 44-18-30(EE). It relied on Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1 (1989).

The petitioner asked whether tax should have been paid and whether § 44-18-30(EE) was unconstitutional. The Division required tax under the regulation but left the constitutional issue to the judiciary.

What this means for you

Booksellers and purchasers

This historical order applied Regulation SU 92-136 to require tax. It does not establish how Rhode Island treats religious texts today.

Taxpayers challenging a statute

The Tax Administrator would apply the tax regulation but would not decide the statute's constitutionality. That issue belonged in court.

Tax and constitutional-law professionals

Separate the two holdings. One addressed tax under an administrative regulation; the other declined jurisdiction over the constitutional challenge.

Common questions

Did the order require sales tax on the Bible? Yes, under Regulation SU 92-136.

What did § 44-18-30(EE) say? The quoted statute exempted canonized scriptures of tax-exempt nonprofit religious organizations.

Did the Division reconcile the regulation and statute on constitutional grounds? No. It applied the regulation and said the judiciary must decide constitutionality.

Were the petitioner's purchase facts complete? No. The source footnote identifies missing timing, location, receipt, and nonpayment evidence.

Does the order decide current law? No. It is a December 1994 ruling applying the law and regulation then presented.

Citations and references

• R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-35-8 — declaratory-ruling authority invoked by the request.
• R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-18-30(EE) — canonized-scripture exemption challenged by the petitioner.
• Rhode Island Regulation SU 92-136 — rule applied to require sales tax.
• Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1 (1989) — U.S. Supreme Court decision cited by the regulation and petitioner.
• Ahlburn, et al. v. R. Gary Clark, Tax Administrator, R.I. Superior Court, Providence County, No. P.C. 93-4595 (November 3, 1993) — court order referenced in the request.

Source

• Landing page: Rhode Island Declaratory Rulings
• Declaratory order: Declaratory Order 1994-03

Original ruling text

Ruling Request No. 94-03

Declaratory Rulings

Ruling Request No. 94-03

Re: Request for Ruling Regarding the Taxation of Bibles and Other Canonized Scriptures

Request for Ruling

Taxpayer requests a declaratory ruling concerning the taxation of bibles and other canonized scriptures under the sales and use tax law. This request is made pursuant to R.I.G.L. 42-35-8 and the Rhode Island Superior Court Order in Ahlburn, et al v. R. Gary Clark, Tax Administrator , R.I. Superior Court, Providence County, No. P.C. 93-4595 (November 3, 1993).

Facts

1. That the petitioner purchased a bible and that the purchase was not taxed;1 2. That on January 1, 1993, the R.I. Tax Administrator caused sales tax Regulation SU 92-136 to be duly promulgated and filed with the R.I. Secretary of State's Office. Regulation SU 92-136 states in its entirety:

REGULATION SU 92-136

BIBLES AND OTHER CANONIZED SCRIPTURES

The sale, storage and use or other consumption in this state of bibles or any other canonized scriptures is subject to tax notwithstanding the provisions of R.I.G.L. Code Section 44-18-30 (HH). Such bibles and other canonized scriptures are subject to tax in accordance with the United States Supreme Court's decision in Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1, 1989.*

R. Gary Clark

Tax Administrator

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1993

*Section 44-18-30 (HH) has been recodified as 44-18-30 (EE).

Ruling Requested

The petitioner seeks a ruling to determine whether he should have paid a Rhode Island sales tax on the purchase of a bible. The petitioner also seeks a declaration of unconstitutionality as to R.I.G.L. 44-18-30 (EE).

Discussion

R.I.G.L. 44-18-30 provides in its pertinent part:

44-18-30. Gross receipts exempt from sales and use taxes. -- There are exempted from the taxes imposed by this chapter the following gross receipts:

(EE) Bibles. From the sale and from the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of any canonized scriptures of any tax exempt nonprofit religious organization including but not limited to the old testament and new testament versions.

The petitioner claims confusion surrounding the taxation of bibles and canonized scriptures and requests the Tax Administrator to declare R.I.G.L. 44-18-30 (EE) unconstitutional citing Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock , 489 U.S. 1 (1989).

Ruling

1. The instant petitioner was required to pay a Rhode Island sales tax on his purchase of a bible pursuant to Regulation SU 92-136.

2. Questions regarding the constitutionality of laws are reserved to the judiciary. Accordingly this office cannot issue an opinion as to the constitutionality of the challenged statute.

**R. Gary Clark

Tax Administrator

December 7, 1994**

1It is noted that the within request for ruling neglects to mention whether the purchase of the bible was prior to or subsequent to the issuance of the Regulation SU 92-136, infra. The request for ruling further fails to state where the bible was purchased and to provide a receipt of said purchase as well as the alleged nonpayment of sales tax.