12 CSR 10-3.216
Permanent Resident Defined (Rescinded March 30, 2001)
AUTHORITY: section 144.270, RSMo 1994. S.T. regulation 020-4
was last filed Dec. 31, 1975, effective Jan. 10, 1976. Refiled March
30, 1976. Amended: Filed Aug. 13, 1980, effective Jan. 1, 1981.
Rescinded: Filed Sept. 27, 2000, effective March 30, 2001.
National Land Management, Inc., v. Director of Revenue,
Case No. RS-81-0639 (A.H.C. 6/6/84). The issue in this case was
whether time sharing arrangements at resorts are subject to sales
tax. The commission initially found that the receipts in question
were not taxable pursuant to section 144.020.1(2), which provides
for imposition of tax on—a) sums paid for admission to places of
amusement, b) sums paid for seating accommodations therein
and c) all fees paid to or in place of amusement.
Regarding the first provision, the commission found that
the sums in question were not paid for admission as that
term is commonly understood. The commission also found that
accommodations were not the subject for which the sums were
paid. With respect to the third provision, the commission found
that the assessments did not apply to any separate fees charged
for the use of petitioner’s amenities but were based on charges for
the time share occupancies.
Next, the commission found that section 144.020.1(6) was
inapplicable, because the payments in question did not constitute
charges for rooms furnished in any hotel, motel, inn, tourist camp
or tourist cabin. Arriving at this conclusion the commission held,
“If the relationship is that of innkeeper and guest, then petitioner
is providing a taxable service; if not, then petitioner’s time share
activities are not taxable under section 144.020.1.”
Looking at the law from various states, the commission held that
the agreements in question constituted vacation leases creating an
assignable interest in real property. Because of the thirty-year
lease, the occupants are not transitory in the sense that travelers
or tourists are. Rooms in petitioner’s resort are not regularly rented
because they are only open to the general public when they are
not already reserved pursuant to one of the previously mentioned
agreements. Thus, the director of revenue failed to meet his
burden of proof by establishing that the agreements in question
constituted taxable service in the form of a room furnished at a
hotel, motel, tourist camp or tourist cabin by an innkeeper.