Alberici Constructors, Inc. v. Director of Revenue
452 S.W.3d 632
Mo.2015Background
- Alberici, a contractor, joined a venture to build a new Holcim cement plant in Missouri.
- Alberici rented five large cranes and a welder from out-of-state vendors for installation work.
- Crane/welder rentals were labeled as equipment or machines; the welder invoice said MACHINE RENTALS.
- Total payments for rentals and a $15,000 Bulldog Erectors delivery charge: $440,075.39.
- May 2010 exemption certificate for rental cranes used solely for installation; Alberici sought use tax refunds for taxes paid on rentals and the delivery.
- AHC denied the refund; Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the AHC’s ruling that cranes/welders are not “materials” and the delivery charge was taxable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether cranes and welder qualify as 'materials' under 144.030.2(5). | Alberici argues they are 'materials' necessary for installation. | Director contends 'materials' excludes machinery like cranes/welders. | No; cranes/welders are not 'materials' under the statute. |
| Whether the $15,000 delivery charge was part of the taxable sale/rental. | Delivery charge separately stated; not taxable as part of sale. | Delivery intended as part of crane rental; taxable. | Delivery charge was part of the crane rental and taxable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Treasurer of State-Custodian of Second Injury Fund v. Witte, 414 S.W.3d 455 (Mo. banc 2013) (statutory interpretation framework; plain meaning when undefined)
- Union Elec. Co. v. Dir. of Revenue, 425 S.W.3d 118 (Mo. banc 2014) (nosier to discern meaning via surrounding words; noscitur a sociis)
- May Dep’t Stores Co. v. Dir. of Revenue, 791 S.W.2d 388 (Mo. banc 1990) (delivery charges as part of sale depends on intent and factors)
- S. Red-E-Mix Co. v. Dir. of Revenue, 894 S.W.2d 164 (Mo. banc 1995) (factors for determining delivery service as part of sale)
- Brinson Appliance, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 843 S.W.2d 350 (Mo. banc 1992) (delivery charges not taxable when seller acts as intermediary and cost/means vary)
- Graham v. Goodman, 850 S.W.2d 351 (Mo. banc 1993) (evidence considerations in contract interpretation)
- May Dep’t Stores Co. v. Dir. of Revenue, 791 S.W.2d 388 (Mo. banc 1990) (delivery charges as part of sale depending on intent)