Does a Utah direct sales company owe Utah tax on free 'hostess gift' items it gives to party hosts who live in other states?

Plain-English summary

A Utah direct sales company sold decorative rubber stamps through independent demonstrators who host home sales parties nationwide. Under its hostess plan, a party host who reaches a certain sales level earns a free stamp set — a "hostess gift" — made or assembled in Utah and shipped from the company's Utah distribution center. The company had been paying Utah tax on all these gifts, even ones shipped to hosts in other states, but two other states audited the company and asserted that tax was actually owed to them instead, because the gift was finally used there. The company asked the Commission to clarify who's actually owed the tax, and whether it's sales tax or use tax.

The Commission confirmed the company's original practice was correct: Utah tax is due on every hostess gift, regardless of where the hostess who receives it lives. Under Utah Admin. Rule R865-19S-68(A), a business that gives away tangible personal property as a "premium" — like a reward for hosting a party — is treated as the "donor," and the donor is legally the user/consumer of that item, not the eventual gift recipient. Because the company consumes the gift in Utah (when it pulls the item out of its resale inventory to give it away), Utah tax attaches at that point, before the item ever leaves the state.

Whether that Utah liability is sales tax or use tax turns on a mechanical distinction in Rule R865-19S-1.A: it's sales tax if a seller collects and remits it (e.g., if the company pays tax to a vendor when buying component parts), and use tax if the company itself remits the tax directly to the Commission (typically after pulling a previously tax-free resale-inventory item out for its own consumption). Either way, the tax base is the company's total cost to acquire the gift in Utah.

The Commission then addressed the company's broader worry about paying tax twice. Its general position: because Utah is the first state where use/consumption occurs (when the item leaves resale inventory in Utah), Utah's tax attaches first and is owed in full — regardless of whether another state also taxes the same item once it arrives there. Most states, through the Multistate Tax Compact or their own statutes, offer a credit for tax already paid to another state, and Utah would do the same in reverse (crediting a company for another state's tax if the party had been hosted in Utah for an out-of-state company). But the Commission can't control whether the other two states in this case actually honor that reciprocity — if they don't, the company's double-taxation problem may not be resolvable at Utah's level, and Utah's own tax liability stays the same either way.

What this means for you

Direct sales companies with premiums, hostess gifts, or sales incentives

If you give away merchandise as a reward for hosting a party, referring a sale, or hitting a sales target, you — not the recipient — are treated as the taxable "consumer" of that item under Rule R865-19S-68(A). That liability attaches where you (the donor) consume/distribute the item from inventory, not where the recipient happens to live.

Multistate direct sellers facing conflicting state tax positions

Expect a real risk of double taxation when your home state and another state both claim the same transaction. Utah's position is that the state where the item first leaves resale inventory taxes first, and other states should credit tax already paid to Utah — but that only works if the other state's law actually provides for such a credit. Check each destination state's reciprocity rules rather than assuming Utah's tax will always be creditable elsewhere.

Accountants tracking sales tax vs. use tax classification

The sales-vs-use-tax label isn't about the nature of the transaction — it's about who remits it. If a seller collects it from you, it's sales tax; if you self-assess and remit it directly, it's use tax. Both apply to the same taxable event here (a donor "consuming" a premium item) but are reported differently.

Common questions

Q: Does it matter that the hostess who gets the gift lives outside Utah?
A: No. Because the company (not the hostess) is legally the "consumer" of the gift under Rule R865-19S-68(A), and it consumes the item in Utah when it removes it from inventory, the destination of the shipment doesn't change Utah's tax position.

Q: Could the item still be taxed again in the hostess's home state?
A: Possibly — that depends entirely on that other state's own sales/use tax laws and whether it offers a credit for tax already paid to Utah. The Commission couldn't resolve that at the Utah level.

Q: Does this ruling guarantee the company won't face double taxation?
A: No. It only confirms Utah's own tax position and describes the general reciprocity principle most states follow; it can't bind other states' tax authorities or guarantee they'll grant a credit.

Citations and references

Rules:

• Utah Admin. Rule R865-19S-68(A) (donor of a premium/gift is treated as the user/consumer; the sale to the donor is taxable)
• Utah Admin. Rule R865-19S-1.A (distinguishes sales tax, collected by a seller, from use tax, remitted by the purchaser)

Source

• Landing page: https://tax.utah.gov/commission/rulings/
• Original PDF: https://files.tax.utah.gov/tax/commission/ruling/04-016.pdf

Original ruling text

REQUEST LETTER

04-016

NAME
ADDRESS

Re: Request for Clarification on Sales/Use Tax Procedures

Company Background:

COMPANY is a Utah corporation. COMPANY is a direct sales company that has independent
demonstrators that solicit sales for decorative rubber stamps and accessories across the United
States. The demonstrators sell through home parties to hostesses and guests. Product is
manufactured in Utah or purchased and shipped from the company’s distribution center, also
located in Utah.

Under the current hostess plan, depending on the level of sales at a party/demonstration, the
hostess is eligible for a stamp set (hostess gift) at no cost. COMPANY Currently remits tax on
all hostess gifts to the State of Utah, even those that are shipped to a hostess in another state.

Issue:

COMPANY Has recently completed an audit from the State of 1ST STATE and 2ND STATE.
Both states assert that tax is due to their jurisdictions based on the fact that the final use in their
state. 2ND STATE stated that COMPANY Incorrectly paid use tax and should have paid sales tax
to Utah and therefore did not allow us a credit for taxes paid to another state.

Currently, COMPANY’S basis for paying tax on all hostess gifts is Utah State Administrative
Rule R865-19S-68, in which the COMPANY would be considered the donor of the hostess gifts
and in accordance with the rule is considered to be the user/consumer and the sale to them is a
taxable sale.

Since the statement concerning exempt items is not clearly defined, the issue was raised by the
1ST STATE auditor. His argument was the statute says “Any item given away as a sales incentive
is exempt to the donor if the sale of the item would have been exempt.” If the statute is based in
Utah taxability, then the incentive would be exempt to the donor, because the sale of the item
would be exempt from Utah sales tax as a sale made in interstate commerce. He stated that this
was reinforced to him by phone conversations he had with the Utah State Tax Commission. He
then suggested we get a more formal answer in writing.

Therefore, COMPANY Is requesting an official clarification on the following issues:

     ▪Is the tax due to the state of Utah on all hostess gifts that the company manufacturers
     and provides as incentives to customers that are located outside of Utah?

Page 2

   ▪If yes, is the tax we pay on these items sales tax as defined in R865-19S-1 since the
   “sale” takes place in Utah or use tax?
   ▪If no, are all items not sold that we ship out of state considered to be exempt from Utah
   tax?

   COMPANY Feels this will be a recurring issue with other states we do business in and
   would appreciate a prompt response.

   Respectfully,

   NAME
   PHONE

                                   RESPONSE LETTER

RE: Private Letter Ruling Request

NAME
ADDRESS

Dear NAME,

    We have received your request for a Private Letter Ruling. You have described

COMPANY as a direct sales company that has independent demonstrators who solicit sales for
decorative rubber stamps and accessories across the United States. The demonstrators sell
through home parties to hostesses and guests. The product is manufactured or assembled in Utah
and shipped from the company’s distribution center, also located in Utah. Under the current
hostess plan the hostess is eligible for a stamp set (hostess gift) at no cost. COMPANY currently
remits tax on all hostess gifts to the State of Utah, including those that are shipped to a hostess in
another state.

     The issue as you have described to us is that your company has been subject to sales tax

audits in 1ST STATE and 2ND STATE. Those states have assessed you for sales and use tax on
the gift sets, which they assert is due to their jurisdictions. You represented that their position is
based on the premise that the final use is in those states.

   You asked three specific questions regarding the gift sets. First, you inquire if tax is due

on hostess gifts provided to persons hosting parties outside of Utah. You next ask if tax is due,
whether it is sales tax or use tax. Finally, you ask if tax was not due, whether all items not sold
that you ship out of state are considered to be exempt from Utah tax.

   We will first respond to your questions directly. Following that we will analyze what

appears to be your overall concern of taxation in multiple states.

Page 3

     In answer to your first question, tax is due on the hostess gifts manufactured in Utah and

provided to persons hosting parties outside of Utah. Under the facts that you have presented,
COMPANY is the final consumer of the hostess gift. As you noted, under Administrative Rule
R685-19S-68 (A), “[d]onors that give away items of tangible personal property as premiums or
otherwise are regarded as the users or consumers of those items and the sale to the donor is a
taxable sale.” Accordingly, you are giving away the hostess gift stamp set as a “premium” to the
hostess for hosting the party. COMPANY is the “donor,” and considered to be the consumer of
the gift stamp set. COMPANY “consumes” the hostess gift stamp set in Utah, and is therefore
liable for sales and use tax in Utah, regardless of where the hostess receives the gift.

  COMPANY is, in other words, responsible for sales or use tax on the cost of

“consuming” the hostess gift. The cost upon which use tax is calculated is the total cost to
COMPANY to acquire the hostess gift in Utah.

     In answer to your second question, the type of tax due depends on how the tax is

collected and remitted. R865-19S-1.A. provides that the tax is a sales tax if collected and
remitted by a seller, or a use tax if remitted by the purchaser. Therefore, if COMPANY pays tax
to a seller on its purchase of parts that it assembles or on individual items that are not assembled
it is a sales tax. On the other hand if COMPANY remits the tax directly the Tax Commission, it
would be a use tax.

    Your third question was whether tax would be due in other States if it were not due here.

If no tax were due in Utah, tax may be due in other States that impose sales or use taxes,
depending on the laws in each of the respective states.

     Having addressed your questions, we would like to expand on the general issue that you

have raised concerning the possibility of double taxation. To begin, most states, either through
the Multistate Tax Compact or through their own individual statutes, provide reciprocity for
sales and use taxes paid to another state. These credits or exemptions provide that the state where
the initial non-exempt purchase occurs imposes the tax. Thereafter, another state should impose
a tax on the transaction only for any difference between the initial tax (if any) and the subsequent
tax.

     Utah’s position is consistent with this general arrangement. Unless COMPANY has

already paid sales tax on the initial acquisition, the first use, consumption, or storage of the
tangible personal property at issue occurs in Utah at the point in time when COMPANY removes
the property from inventory held for resale. At that point, the property is subject to the Utah use
tax. It is no longer held as inventory for resale and is therefore no longer subject to the resale
exemption. Therefore, if COMPANY purchases the items or materials without paying sales tax,
it must pay use tax on that transaction once it is determined that the tax is owing.

Because Utah is the first state where use tax becomes due, we consider the company is liable for
the entire amount of Utah use tax, even if another state also imposes use tax on the same
property. Should the same property subsequently become subject to another state's use tax, most
states allow the company to apply a credit of the use tax paid to the Utah to that liability imposed

Page 4

by the other state.

   Utah’s position would be the same if the situation were reversed. That is, if COMPANY

were located in another state and the party were hosted in Utah, we would impose a use tax on
COMPANY, but would allow a credit for the tax paid to another state.

     In short, should another state impose a use tax on COMPANY, it should also provide a

credit for taxes paid in Utah. However, we do not know the exact provisions in other states for
sales tax imposition or reciprocity in multi-state transactions. However, because Utah is the first
state in which the use tax becomes due, even if another state does not allow such a credit, the
Utah use tax is unaffected. If 1ST STATE or 2ND STATE have different policies that do not
provide for credits for taxes paid to another state, your issue may not be able to be resolved at
this level.

    Our decision is based on the facts as you have represented them. If the fact should prove

different, our opinion may change accordingly.

                                                 For the Commission,



                                                 Marc B. Johnson
                                                 Commissioner

MBJ/SR
04-016