in-20250430-IR-045250193NRA: DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVENUE

DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVENUE FINAL ORDER DENYING REFUND: 03-20242093 Sales Tax For the Years 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 HOLDING The Department was unable to agree with Motor Carrier that it provided information sufficient to justify granting a refund of sales tax paid on Motor Carrier’s transactions with a vehicle rental company. ISSUE

I. Gross Retail Tax – Sales Tax Refund.

Authority: IC 6-2.5-2-1; IC 6-8.1-9-1; Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue v. Caterpillar, Inc., 15 N.E.3d 579 (Ind. 2014); Wendt LLP v. Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue, 977 N.E.2d 480 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2012); Scopelite v. Indiana Dep’t of Local Gov’t Fin., 939 N.E.2d 1138 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2010); 45 IAC 15-9-2. Taxpayer argues that it is entitled to a refund of sales tax collected by a vehicle rental company. STATEMENT OF FACTS Taxpayer is a company in the business of providing transportation services. Taxpayer operates out of locations in Indiana and Illinois. Taxpayer submitted a claim for a refund of sales tax it paid to a “commercial vehicle rental program” that provides Taxpayer rental vehicles. Taxpayer’s refund request (Form GA-110L) sought a refund of approximately $26,000. The Indiana Department of Revenue (“Department”) reviewed the refund request and denied Taxpayer’s refund in part. The Department refunded approximately $12,000 but denied the remaining $14,000. In a letter dated March 2024, the Department explained why Taxpayer’s refund was denied in part. Taxpayer disagreed with the Department’s decision and submitted a protest to that effect. This Final Order Denying Refund results and is based on the information Taxpayer provided and on information available to the Department.

I. Gross Retail Tax – Sales Tax Refund.

DISCUSSION The issue is whether Taxpayer has met its burden of establishing that it is entitled to a refund of sales tax paid on transactions conducted with a vehicle rental company. Where, as here, a taxpayer is challenging the taxability of Indiana sales transactions, the taxpayer is required to provide documentation explaining and supporting its challenge. Poorly developed and non-cogent arguments are subject to waiver. Scopelite v. Indiana Dep’t of Local Gov’t Fin., 939 N.E.2d 1138, 1145 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2010); Wendt LLP v. Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue, 977 N.E.2d 480, 486 n.9 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2012). When an agency is charged with enforcing a statute, the jurisprudence defers to the agency’s reasonable interpretation of that statute “over an equally reasonable interpretation by another party.” Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue v. Caterpillar, Inc., 15 N.E.3d 579, 583 (Ind. 2014). The Department generally “has no legal method of generating a claim for refund. A claim for refund can only be initiated pursuant to IC 6-8.1-9-1.” 45 IAC 15-9-2(b) (Emphasis added). IC 6-8.1-9-1(a) (applicable to the Tax Year at Issue), in part, states: The Department denied the sales tax refund because the vehicle rental invoices did not indicate that sales tax was paid on the transactions. Taxpayer’s argument follows: Taxpayer’s claim is based on the premise that the rental company is registered with the Department to collect sales tax and – as a result – the sales tax amount is included in the rental price charged. For example, if Taxpayer paid $100 to the rental company, by necessity, seven dollars of that amount must be sales tax. In the case of the sales tax, the Department must disagree with Taxpayer’s argument because to conclude otherwise would require the Department to speculate on the manner in which the rental company bills its customers. Such speculation would require the Department to ignore entirely the “separately stated” provision specified in IC 6-2.5-2-1(b). In part, the statute requires: In passing, Taxpayer suggests that a portion of the refund consists of “Indiana ride share tax.” It is not possible to address Taxpayer’s suggestion because Taxpayer has failed to explain or develop the issue. HOLDING Taxpayer’s protest is respectfully denied. February 19, 2025 Replaces Finding Document at: New