Labor or Services Rendered (Rescinded October 30, 2002)

AUTHORITY: section 144.270, RSMo 1994. This rule was previously filed as rule no. 17 Jan. 22, 1973, effective Feb. 1, 1973. S.T. regulation 010-18 was last filed Dec. 31, 1975, effective Jan. 10, 1976. Refiled March 30, 1976. Amended: Filed Aug. 13, 1980, effective Jan. 1, 1981. Amended: Filed Sept. 7, 1984, effective Jan. 12, 1985. Rescinded: Filed April 1, 2002, effective Oct. 30, 2002. In Kurtz Concrete, Inc. v. Spradling, 560 SW2d 858 (Mo. banc 1978), the court held while title ordinarily will not pass until property is delivered to buyer or reaches the agreed place, but title will pass notwithstanding that seller is to make delivery if such is the intention of the parties, the intention of the parties to control. Signs by Sherri v. Director of Revenue, Case No. RS-84-2142 (A.H.C. 3/5/87). In this sales tax case, the taxpayer was a sign painter, and argued that it provided a nontaxable service. The Administrative Hearing Commission found that the taxpayer was selling tangible personal property and was therefore subject to sales tax. In making this decision, the Administrative Hearing Commission utilized the true object test. This test examines the real object sought by the buyer, that is, whether it was the buyer’s object to obtain an act personally done by an individual as an economic service involving either intellectual or manual effort of an individual, or if it was the buyer’s object to obtain only the salable end product of some individual skill. Here, the Administrative Hearing Commission determined that the taxpayer’s customers sought to obtain the finished end product, that is, signs, and therefore the transactions were subject to sales tax. Capital Automated Ticket Services, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, Case No. RS-84-1813 and RS-85-1778 (A.H.C. 9/12/88). The issue in this case considered whether sales tax could be imposed on service charges levied by the petitioner as a fee on the purchase of tickets to various events. The Administrative Hearing Commission determined that the service charges were a nontaxable service and not a fee charged for admission to a place of amusement.