Could a Utah corporate headquarters use an old authorization number to self-accrue sales and use tax instead of paying tax to vendors?

Short answer No. The Commission said Utah law and rules did not authorize a direct-pay permit and it found no written authorization allowing the company to self-accrue tax. The company had to pay tax to vendors on consumable purchases unless a purchase was for resale as tangible personal property or the vendor was an unlicensed out-of-state seller.
State
UT
Ruling
PLR 89-011
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1990-01-17
Issued by
Utah State Tax Commission
Requested by
A corporate accounting director seeking written authority to self-accrue sales and use tax

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1990. Ask about yours and see what current Utah tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1990
Subsequent statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later rulings may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, rate, or position mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This official Utah State Tax Commission private letter ruling applied Utah Code § 59-12-104(28), Rule R865-19-23S, and the company's purchasing facts in the January 17, 1990 response. The Commission found no statutory or regulatory direct-pay-permit authority and no written authorization for the requester. Another taxpayer cannot assume the same result applies to later permits, different authorization documents, resale inventory, unlicensed out-of-state vendors, centrally billed purchases, reorganized entities, or current law. Utah's direct-pay, vendor-collection, resale, and self-accrual rules may have changed. This summary is informational only and is not legal or tax advice.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official state tax ruling. The original ruling (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ruling (PDF)

Plain-English summary

Utah Private Letter Ruling 89-011 addressed a corporation that wanted its headquarters to self-accrue sales and use tax on purchases.

The company referred to an old identification number previously used across its Utah operations, but it could not locate an official authorization letter.

The Commission denied the request.

No direct-pay permit authority

The Auditing Division said Utah's code and rules contained no provision authorizing a direct-pay permit.

The Commission also found no written document or authorization letter allowing the company to self-accrue tax.

Vendor collection

Unless a purchase was for resale as tangible personal property, the purchaser generally had to pay tax to the vendor.

The response stated an exception for an unlicensed out-of-state vendor.

The Commission directed the company to pay tax to vendors on consumable purchases and revise its purchasing method to comply with the law.

Holding

Under the stated facts:

  • No Utah code or rule authorized the requested direct-pay permit.
  • No written self-accrual authorization was found for the company.
  • The self-accrual request was denied.
  • Tax on consumable purchases had to be paid to vendors.
  • Purchases for resale and purchases from an unlicensed out-of-state vendor were treated separately in the response.
  • The company had to revise its purchasing method.

What this means for you

Corporate accounting and procurement teams

Do not rely on a legacy account number as proof of direct-pay authority when no governing authorization can be produced.

Multidivision businesses

A reorganization or separate divisional treatment does not establish that headquarters may use another entity's or operation's historical purchasing method.

Accountants and tax professionals

Verify current authorization requirements and distinguish consumable purchases from inventory acquired for resale.

Common questions

Q: Could the headquarters self-accrue tax under the old number?

A: No.

Q: Did the Commission find a direct-pay permit provision?

A: No.

Q: How were consumable purchases handled?

A: The company had to pay tax to vendors.

Q: What resale exception did the ruling mention?

A: Purchases for resale as tangible personal property were not treated as taxable consumable purchases.

Key source language

  • Permit authority: “There is no provision in the Utah code or rules authorizing a ‘direct pay permit.’”
  • Missing authorization: the Division was “not aware of a written document or authorization letter allowing Petitioner to self accrue tax.”
  • Denial: the Division recommended that the request “be denied.”
  • Required method: the company was directed “to pay tax to vendors of consumable purchases.”

Citations and references

  • Utah Code Ann. § 59-12-104(28)
  • Utah Sales Tax Rule R865-19-23S

Source

  • Landing page: Utah Private Letter Rulings
  • Official ruling: Utah PLR 89-011
  • Scope note: the company said it could not locate an official letter authorizing use of the historical identification number.
  • Fetch note: the exact official URL returned HTTP 404 to a direct request and was then retrieved through Sofya.

Original ruling text

Response
January 17, 1990

January
17, 1990

XXXXX

Corporate
Accounting

Re:
Advisory Opinion - Sales Tax Reporting Method

Dear
XXXXX:

This
letter is in response to your December 13, 1989 request for an advisory opinion that XXXXX be allowed to self accrue sales or use tax on your purchases. It is the policy of the Tax Commission to refer such requests to its division most qualified to analyze the request to make recommendations for rendering an opinion. Your request was referred to the Auditing Division whose recommendations are as follows:

1.
There is no provision in the Utah code or rules authorizing a "direct pay permit." Unless a purchase is for "resale" as tangible personal property, he purchaser is required to pay tax to the vendor, providing the vendor is not an unlicensed out of state vendor. See �59-12-104(28) and Rule R865-19-23S.

2.
We are not aware of a written document or authorization letter allowing Petitioner to self accrue tax.

3.
Respondent recommends Petitioner's request be denied and that they be directed to pay tax to vendors of consumable purchases in accordance with current statute and rule.

Based
upon information furnished by the Auditing Division, we are in agreement with them, and advise that you revise your method of purchasing to comply with law.

For
the Commission,

Joe
B. Pacheco

Commissioner

M
E M O R A N D U M

DATE: December 19, 1989

TO: XXXXX

Auditing

FROM: XXXXX

Commission Secretary

SUBJECT:
Request for Advisory Opinion

XXXXX
has requested a declaratory judgment/advisory opinion on XXXXX Sales Tax Authorization.

Please
respond according to the guidelines established by the Commission. Thank you.

13
December 1989

XXXXX

Utah
State Tax Commission

Attention:
Commissioners

160
East 300 South

Fifth
Floor

Salt
Lake City, Utah 84134

RE:
XXXXX Sales Tax Authorization

Dear
Commissioners:

We
recently have gone through a reorganization of XXXXX in XXXXX Utah. Under that reorganization we have organized three separate and distinct divisions which have applied for and received a special authorization to accrue sales and use tax on all purchases made by each division. Our Corporate headquarters are located in the city of Ogden and we would like to use the old XXXXX special authorization to self accrue our own sales and use tax on our purchases made by the Corporate headquarters. That Identification Number is XXXXX. This number has, in the past, been utilized for such purchases at all of our Utah operations.

We
have been unable to locate an official letter of authorization documenting that use. We would appreciate you so authorizing, in writing, that number for our Corporate headquarters to self-accrue our own sales and use tax on all purchases. This authorization will avoid confusion of many common vendors we have with our XXXXX divisions.

If
you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at XXXXX. We appreciate your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

XXXXX,
Director

Corporate
Accounting

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1990. Ezel checks current Utah tax law against your situation and cites the authority it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace