In Re the Sales & Use Tax Refund Request of Media One, Inc., License No. 51-0180701-ST

1997 SD 17 AND USE MATTER OF SALES

In the REQUEST MEDIA OF TAX REFUND INC., ONE, No. 51-0180701-ST. License 19401, 19411.

Nos. Supreme Court of South Dakota. 4, 1996. on Briefs Dec. Considered 19, 1997. Decided Feb. Rehearing March Denied Department

[¶ 3] reversed the ALJ’s opinion findings and substituted its own fact and Department conclusions of law. The exempt concluded that the tax advertis- ing performed prepar- services are those ing placing advertisements in the adver- media, tising advertising agency and that an required pay sales tax on those transac- prepares tions where it an advertisement but place does not it in media. appealed [¶ 4] Media One to the circuit court, Department. which reversed the Cir- Judge cuit Court Kean held an advertis- ing agency “places” an advertisement media, exemption pur- for tax poses, no matter what medium the advertise- ment is in or on. The court listed examples of media that en- Magee, Special Attorney Jack C. Assistant General, Pierre, compassed billboards, containers, appellant signs, for as South Dakota Department of Revenue. papers, imposed and television. The court constructive trust for the return to Media Christopherson, A. James Hertz of Baffin One’s customers of the sales tax. The court Anderson, Falls, appellee & Sioux Media granted attorney One, fees to Media but One, Inc. trust, against ordered them taxed rather SABERS, Justice. directly against Department. than This appeal followed. appeals [¶ 1] The of Revenue a circuit court decision which reversed an [¶ 5] WHETHER DEPARTMENT taxpay- administrative determination that the TIMELY FILED ITS APPEAL er was not entitled to a sales tax refund. We agree with the that the tax [¶ 6] Media One claims that the De does partment’s appeal untimely. SDCL 15- include the sale certain provides, 26A-6 in relevant property by advertising agency. By no- appeal judgment An must be review, taxpayer challenges tice of the timeli- sixty days taken within judgment after the Department’s ness of appeal appro- and the attested, signed, filed and written shall be priate standard of review. entry notice of thereof shall have been given party. to the adverse FACTS argues Media One One, 2] November Media Inc. sixty day period time commenced on (Media One), advertising agency in Sioux September 1995, upon filing Judge Falls, sought a refund of charged sales tax it stating reversal, Kean’s letter his reasons for its clients and remitted to Department. accompanied by judgment findings his hearing, After a judge administrative law fact and conclusions of law. It asserts that (ALJ) found in Media One’s favor that the these documents constituted “written notice ultimately it delivers to its client is entry” exempt purposes “advertising SDCL 15-26A-6. services” even According argument, when Media place sixty days One does not it in media. elapsed 1995,1 on November and there- him, three-day 1. This includes a paper upon allowance for mail- notice or other or whenever 15-6-6(e): ing. See SDCL required pre- such service is to be made a event, party right period specified required Whenever a has the scribed before a or is and the mail, proceedings paper to do some act days or take some with- notice or is served three prescribed period in a prescribed period. after the service of a shall be added to the ap- 2. STANDARD OF REVIEW fore, filing [¶ 8] of its notice of Department’s too late. 1995 was peal on November reviewing Our role adminis [¶ 9] appeals is trative well-settled: argument One’s is with agency’s findings We will overrule an merit; did not con Judge Kean’s letter out clearly fact when erroneous. entry” signed, notice of stitute “written question The is not whether there is sub- attested, judgment. Initially, we filed contrary agency stantial evidence letter, judgment, and the note that finding, but there is substantial whether of law findings of fact and conclusions were agency finding. In support evidence to 15,1995. Although September until not filed words, other if is evidence in even there Department of notice to the it constituted to contradict the the record which tends disposition of the “notwithstand court’s determination, Department’s factual so party by mail to the ing actual notice adverse long as there is some “substantial evi- judgment, final ‘without a of the trial court’s supports dence” in the record which entry, sixty days do not written notice of determination, Department’s this court will ” Porter, Porter v. 1996 commence to run.’ weight given affirm. Great to the find- ¶6, 22, 448, (quoting 542 N.W.2d SD ings made and inferences drawn Inc., Beverages, Kallstrom v. Marshall agency questions on of fact. Conclusions (S.D.1986)). In Kallstrom we N.W.2d 647 given fully of law are no deference and are stated: reviewable. Co., Tire Hendrix Graham N.W.2d entry judgment gives of to a A notice of (S.D.1994) (citations 876, and internal 878-79 power running the time ;party the set omitted). quotations We review the adminis- adversary may appeal which his after any pre- agency’s trative decision without statutory party that the and assures each sumption that the circuit court’s decision was may appeal period within which he of time County, Clay 534 N.W.2d correct. Nilson to run until his adver- does not commence (S.D.1995). 598, 600 sary given notice. has such question imposes The of whether statute added) (citation (emphasis 397 N.W.2d at 650 given factual situation is a a tax under a omitted). emphasized language indi As the impose which question of law. Statutes cates, duty party of one to serve the it is the liberally in favor taxes are to be construed entry notice of of other with the written taxpayer strictly against of the mailings

judgment. Judge Kean’s did not exempting property taxing body. Statutes entry judgment, of strictly contain a written notice of taxation be construed should party taxing power. and he was not a to this case.2 The words in favor of the reasonable, 29, given a days September such statutes should be sixty commenced on natural, practical meaning to effectu- 1995, day after3 Media One served purpose exemption. of the ate the entry by mail of written notice attested, signed, judgment. and filed of the Cty. Corp. v. Aurora Bd. National Food of Therefore, timely (S.D.1995) Department could Comm’rs, 564, have 30, 1995. Plastics, appeal Depart- filed an as late as November (citing Thermoset 136, appeal of on November 138-39 It filed its notice 473 N.W.2d of (S.D.1991)); He Crow v. statutory see also Estate timeframe. within the thoughts objections, on what assuming correspondence he can focus his 2. Even entry judg- original). actually adopted. court could constitute notice ment, Judge open possibility Kean’s letter left n judgment was not final: that his 15-6-6(a), provides, in relevant 3. See findings and Media One’s most recent set of and, signed by were the Court conclusions along prescribed computing any period time proposed judgment signed, court, chapter, by order of allowed September filed with the Clerk on statute, act, day by any applicable many have been so different sets Because there event, designated from which the or default around, I am with Mr. Ma- of documents sent gee’s period begins be in- time to run shall not photocopy sending I letters him a of what so, any actually signed cluded. if he had additional Jensen, (S.D.1992) secretary promulgate revenue (“[W]e construe administrative rules accord- pursuant chapter rules concerning: 1-26 ing to their intent as determined from the relating rule as a whole and other rules (3) Determining application of the tax subject.”). the same exemptions^] [¶ 10] The claims that agency “Rule” is defined as “each statement interpretation court should defer to its general applicability implements, in- statutes, relying upon In re Tax Sales law, terprets, prescribes policy, procedure, Cheese, Queen Valley Liab. practice requirements any agency.” (S.D.1986), where we stated: “[T]he 1-26-1(8). Depart- This means the interpretation given construction and a stat ment is authorized to applica- “determine the by body charged ute an administrative rules, tion” of the statute in its great administration is entitled to which it has done. The courts this state (Citation omitted). weight.” By notice of agency enforce properly rules once review, Media One contends Depart the adopted by Legislature. the SDCL 1-26-6.8. statutory ment’s construction is entitled to Department The current of Revenue rules expressly by deference when authorized adopted were in 1987. SDCL 1-26A-1.10. support position, statute. of its “Administrative rules have points the force of law Merchandising to Modern v. De partment presumed Dorhout, and are valid.” State N.W.2d (S.D.1986), (S.D.1994) (citations where we stated: 513 N.W.2d omitted); Mortenson, Duffy gives This court no accord deference to a lower (S.D.1993). legal court’s conclusion. It Although is true some we “great weight” cases agency’s accord to an give great weight Department’s rules, to the statutory interpretation. However, give we no deference to its conclusions of law applies only agency rule when the is ex- in Depart- contested cases. Whether the pressly authorized statute to make such correctly applied presents its rules interpretation. Secretary of Reve- law; question of when resolution dispute given nue has been power no such under presents question of law we accord no applicable the in statutes this case. Com- deference to the conclusions reached the pare re Tax [In Liab. Webber Furni- Department or the circuit court. Sioux ture, (S.D.1980) (involv- 290 N.W.2d 865 ] Newspapers, Falls Secretary Reve- 10-46-1(6) ing SDCL expressly nue, (S.D.1988) (cita- gives Secretary the power of Revenue to omitted). tions interpret meaning the “agents” of the word 3. WHETHER purposes).4 use tax MEDIA ONE IS ENTITLED AN TO EXEMPTION (Other omitted). citations We must deter- FOR “ADVERTISING SERVICES” mine whether there is a similar statute which IT WHEN AN PREPARES ADVER- grants Department authority regu- to TISEMENT OR PRODUCT FOR A late application the tax CLIENT DOES NOT IT BUT PLACE statutes. IN THE MEDIA ADVERTISING Department [¶ 11] The claims that provides SDCL 10-45-47.1 imposed “upon gross authorization5 for Sales tax is interpret it to “advertising receipts any services”: person engaging 4. The statute Department cited in Webber Furniture is now 5. The also claims that SDCL 10-1- 10-46-1(7) provides, part: statutory SDCL authorizes in construction. That stat provides, ute in relevant "It shall be the revenue, opinion secretary [I]f in of the duty secretary of revenue and he shall necessary it is for the efficient administration power have to construe the tax laws of the state salesmen, chapter regard any of this repre- to requested by any acting whenever under officer sentatives, truckers, peddlers or canvassers as such [.]" laws This is not a agents secretary ... of revenue so employee matter of a of Revenue dealers, regard may regard them and dis- seeking officer clarification of a tax law. This tributors, supervisors, employers persons provide express statute does not authorization to purposes chapter[.] retailers for of this define terms in statutes. illustration, in any lining, retouching, air brush- practice in business continuing ing, screening, editing. is rendered ... unless silk which a service exempt[.]” 10- specifically service is applies receipts gross Sales “Advertising specifically services” are 45-4. tangible personal property per- sales of exempt tax via SDCL 10-45-12.1. from sales providing advertising sons services for use following promulgated consumption preparing advertise- rule, “advertising term ser- which defines applies following: pa- ments. Tax vices,” parameters exemp- and sets ink, paint, tools, type, per, supplies, office tion: charges by printers production Advertising services are business of booklets, brochures, pamphlets, and other preparing publication advertisements for printed material them. newspapers, magazines, plaeemats, bill- adopted 64:06:02:03. This rule was ARSD boards, handbills or for broadcast 1987. See SDCL 1-26A-1.10. As noted welcoming which contact new resi- “[ajdministrative above, rules have the force explain ser- dents and others business Dorhout, presumed of law and are valid.” promotional area and vices within the leave 394; Duffy, at 497 N.W.2d at literature. advertising Charges newspapers for in in At issue [¶ 14] this case is whether Likewise, magazines are not taxable. by to certain items delivered Media One by charges advertising agencies made exempt advertising constitutes customers preparing placing advertising in adver- and tangible personal proper- or taxable services charges and tising are for services media ty.6 claims that items such as not taxable. therefore cards,7 point-of-purchase posters,8 counter by purchased agency to assist Services the sheets,9 videos, newsletters, dealer announce- project current completing it in a for a ments, produced and advertisement slicks10 subject not tax if the customer are to directly by Media One and to the delivered integral inseparable and com- service is an customer are outside the and sub- ponent its cus- of the ultimate service to ject All to sales tax. of these items become agency provides and the the service tomer customer, property of the who deter- the provider a Exam- resale certificate. if they when and will be used or mines ples that of services be considered public, they displayed to the and whether will they integral insepara- if are an and resale placed in the media. ever be work, product final part ble are art hand, One, proofreading, copywriting, handlettering, Media on the other ar- [¶ 15] gues primarily it an adver- photo finishing, modeling, photography, providing rental, through activity production tising rent- “creative and photo studio studio service rental, rental, consultation,” al, place- act of and that the video studio audio studio client effects, rental, prop rights, of the advertisement onto these various music sound key- comparison and in typesetting, separation, color is incidental minimal dubbing, items prepared prepared sheets are for manufacturers 6. where Media One both 9. Dealer Transactions products prod- present an it in the advertisement to their or wholesalers not the media were within subject example at retailers. The discussed uct to appeal. of this pictures hearing was a dealer sheet with descriptions of doors. The sheets are certain designed by to be 7. are One These cards Media ultimately to entice them to sent retailers product displayed displayed in stores where inventory. the doors in their include by printing They printed or sold. are an outside by company printer Media and delivered ready-made are adver- 10. Advertisement slicks presented example in this case One’s client. copied can be Media One’s tisements that display was a cardboard with slots to hold brochure, newspaper, publication in a clients purchase oven mitt. The mitt free with properly of pizzas. The slick or flier. client, becomes "Moose Brothers” two reproduction responsible who is for its designed displayed posters are also to be placement in the media. product is sold. where a Columns, features, creating in expended the final skills. to the hours editorials Buchwald, outcome. such as those written Art Landers, Bombeck, Sylvia Ann Erma Port- tangible personal property [¶ 16] Sales of er, Will, Goodman, George and Ellen are subject are to sales tax: just reporting of current rote news imposed hereby upon a tax There is ... events; they product are the finished gross receipts tangible of all sales of Likewise, writer’s skills. the comics are personal property consisting goods, product of an finished artist’s or writ- merchandise, wares, except as taxed Therefore, er’s skills. we hold that these except § provid- 10-45-3 and as otherwise syndicated tangible personal are materials chapter, in sold at in ed retail property. State of South Dakota consumers or omitted) (citation users. (emphasis Id. at 810 in original). argues 10-45-2. SDCL that its services severed from cannot be the final Regardless preparation product, solely it is and therefore services expended developing time in the items at however, providing; that it is in calculating issue end result is a transac gross receipts, deduction is “no allowed for prod tion where sells the Media One finished purchased.” cost of labor employees’ uct of its skills — 10^5-1(3) (emphasis See Id. consumer. —to Inc., Pledger v. Baldor 309 Ark. Int'l belongs media custom (1992) (stating 827 S.W.2d 648-49 Corp. er alone. See K Mart South Dakota separated be services cannot from mate (S.D. Dep’t necessarily rials when included 1984) (finding applicable use tax to advertise or advertising costs of final ma “by [taxpayer’s] ments ownership virtue of tangible personal constituting proper terials supplements power the its and determine ty, billing clearly distinguished even when the date of distribution and the number of goods); between services and Jackson Ad distributed”). copies to be We look to SDCL Assessor, vertising Corp. v. Tax State 10-45-12.1 and 64:06:02:03 to ARSD deter (Me.1988) (“The A.2d fact that mine whether these transactions are entitled property subject of a the sale is custom made exemption. principal and that labor is the cost factor does not establish the contract as one for ARSD 64:06:02:03 defines sale.”); rendition of rather than services “advertising as services” “the business of Sneary v. Director 865 S.W.2d preparing publication for advertisements bane) (Mo.1993) (en (rejecting simi newspapers, magazines, plaeemats, bill argument noting lar that and architectural boards, or or for handbills broadcast.” The qua illustration is the sine non of the ser Department exemption requires held that the rendered). vices advertising agency prepare the to both the it in place advertisement and Newspapers Falls [¶ 17] Sioux in agree reading media. a fair belongs We that structs that the focus on the transac tion, 64:06:02:03, second participants.11 paragraph not the ARSD character In that “charges by advertising agencies N.W.2d at 808. we dis made for syndicated cussed whether columnists’ preparing work placing advertising and in adver tangible personal property: constituted tising charges media are for services and therefore not dictates this taxable” conclu necessary It is not for us to determine Additionally, agree sion. phrase, we that the intangible whether be information “advertising regula used in tangible media” —as severed from medium paragraph, tion —refers back to the first transmission. items involved in information, requires publication which to occur in assessment are not raw but news tangible papers, billboards, magazines, end of an individual’s or "Regardless Argus selling tangible of whether is characterized inserts were those retailer printer, newspa- as a per, service or a printing transactions Lewis provision broadcast, by the for a “use” presumably radio or television.12 demonstrated interpretation 10-46-1(12): would contradict Any other on such items. See SDCL rule, which language of the defines plain “Use,” right power the exercise over “advertising as the “business of services” tangible property personal incidental publication” in preparing advertisements ownership property, except of that that these, these, media. “[W]e and listed property it does include the sale of that according to their construe statutes must regular in the course business.16 “Use” intent, intent determined from must be types also use of includes the of ser- whole, as as a as well enact- the statutes subject.”13 vices, relating receipts gross same from the sale of ments Whalen, 276, 280 Whalen v. 490 N.W.2d which are to be included the measure of (citations omitted). (S.D.1992) Therefore, 10-45, by chapter any tax imposed point-of-purchase production and sale delivery amendments thereto and the sheets, cards, posters, dealer news- counter causing delivery tangible into this state announcements, letters, videos, and adver- personal property intended to advertise exemption.14 are slicks outside tisement products promote or services or facili- Although Media claims these items tate sales to Dakota South residents. services, very are exempt specifically the items taxed as not similar to fact is a that there Mart, in K at 58.15 exempt tax on leads use these items us to conclude that there also be a tax on the must Further these items evidence [¶20] items, same as a use tax cannot exist in the personal outside See, e.g., absence of a sales tax. Northweste presumed tent is clear face of the to consumer.” statute.” at 808. (S.D. DeNoyer, State v. (citation omitted); 1995) Christopherson see logic including place- handbills 12. The Reeves, 634, 642, readily apparent 44 S.D. 184 N.W. in this section is not mats (1921) (noting statutory definitions “of appears somewhat aberrational. control). course" 10-45-4.1, comports with SDCL 13. Our decision See, interpretation. e.g., 15. This a common defines “services'' as “all activities en- fee, retainer, Country Mt. gaged commission, persons other for a Travelhost v. Director in for Ozark of of Revenue, 541, (Mo.1990) (en monetary charge, or other 785 S.W.2d 544-45 banc), (“[When] predominantly performance advertising sold is no activities involve service idea, selling distinguished proper- a service as communication of the of more than the oral service, determining ty. spoken tangible In what is intend- the medium is the word and no use, However, objective principal objective or ultimate personal property ed involved. is contracting parties not be of the shall control- extent the idea must be communicated that contrast, transactions, ling.” non-exempt tape, through e.g., In in an audio a different medium — item, arrangement but tape, the customer receives a not the of ink a video or the creative having its paper tangible personal property advertised in the re- service is on — Indus., Limbach, advertising media. quired.”); Emery 43 Inc. v. 134, 608, (1989) N.E.2d Ohio 539 613 St.3d fact, overly advertising (stating 14. In the trial court's broad defini- test of an that the whether depends, upon and me- whether the tion of services transaction is taxable "consequential included items handed out or delivered di- is a ele- dia transfer of the Omaha, transaction); rectly consumers never in the to and ment” of the Val-Pak cf. Revenue, 776, 545 media. Such a broad definition is Inc. v. 249 Neb. Mart, 447, (1996) contrary Newspapers (finding and to Sioux K that control Falls N.W.2d 449-50 preparation supra, and undermines the intent of statute of direct-mail over and distribution use). the rule: constituted a taxable and materials unambiguous is When a statute clear and it is interpreted exception: attempt go previously improper 16. We have this to to behind courts tax, provision to mean use con- express terms so to "We understand this as relationship complementary to legislate that words of the do sistent with its which the statute tax, words, applies provide. generally to transactions sales retail themselves In other not pur- unambiguous where items are a clear and not to transactions “letter of statute Newspapers, disregarded pretext 423 chased Sioux Falls cannot be under the for resale.” spirit, legislative pursuing N.W.2d at in- 810. because Gillis, MILLER, C.J., 22] Sioux Falls v. and KONENKAMP [¶ rn Nat’l Bank of GILBERTSON, JJ., (1967): 293, concur. 457, 467, 148 S.D. N.W.2d AMUNDSON, J., specially. concurs [¶23] raising money help is to In to it addition state, subject in this who are retailers AMUNDSON, (concurring special- Justice tax, compete equal to on an foot- the sales ty)- ing competitors. with out-of-state Court, its brief to this Media One argues that in its business is classified Standard Industrial Manual Classification complements supplements The use tax under the Business section. The Services legislature has imposing upon those sub- determined services of a the sales tax major corporation group identified in 73 of ject equal to it a tax burden to the sales subject pursuant the manual are to tax tax in order that sold utilized states, to 10-45-5.2. statute This in this state would be once for taxable support government.17 of state following services enumerated in (Citations omitted.) the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987, prepared the Statisti- above, As noted Policy Manage- cal Division of the Office strictly statutes are construed in favor of the Budget, President, Office taxing power taxpayer and “the the bur has specifically subject the tax to levied proving exemption.” den of entitlement to an chapter; (Major ... this business services State, Valley Hosp. Sioux Ass’n 73); group ... The services enumerated in (S.D.1994) (citation omitted). 334, section this not be construed as a prov One did meet its burden comprehensive list of taxable services but ing entitlement these representative as a list of rather items; therefore, opinion the circuit court’s chapter, to be intended taxable under pro reversed this matter remanded added) (emphasis ceedings consistent with this decision.18 In Therefore, Media One made admission of decision, concerning view of this the issues taxability dispositive appeal. which is of this attorney taxpayer’s fees and the circuit See, Tuttle, e.g., Tuttle v. imposition court’s of a constructive trust (S.D.1987)(stating 878 n. 2 that an admission directly taxpayer’s refund customers are binding party) a brief is on debt Reichert, (cross-referencing moot. Reichert Faith, People impose property, . Accord tax on each item unless (Tax. excluded, specifically point 161 Ariz. 779 P.2d at some in the chain dismissed, Ct.1989), appeal 164 Ariz. purchased of commerce.... If the item ("[S]ales (Ct.App.1990) P.2d 369 and use Nebraska, taxes applies. If sales tax the item is complementary."); taxes are see Sioux Falls Nebraska, purchased ap outside of the use tax ("The Newspapers, 423 N.W.2d at 810 n. 3 com Jackson, Svcs., plies.”); Pan Am World 754 pensatory property use tax is levied on used 53, (Tenn.1988) ("Sales S.W.2d 56 and uses of property within if that have the state would been personal equally are treated subject state.”); purchased tax to sales if within the purposes.”). the statute for under most Mech., Depart v. Howard Elec. & Inc. Revenue, 475, (Colo.1989) 771 P.2d 477 Department 18. Prior to this adhered to ("A to, supplementary use tax is considered not policy apply a where did un- from, separate sales [use] tax .... tax is in less the advertisement was in the advertis- reality right upon upon a to use ing days preparation. media within 90 of its paid.”); which a tax has not Associ sales been Department policy ruled in this case was Revenue, Leasing, ates Inc. arbitrary and held One’s that Media customers 210, (Iowa 1990) ("[Use tax] were entitled to a refund the sales tax Media complement enacted to our sales tax remov erroneously remitted collected and in accor- ing temptation buyer’s purchase goods a out of policy. Although tax.”); dance not mentioned payment state to Inter avoid party's appealed Printing state in either brief nor the De- Co. v. 519, ("The (1990) partment, Neb. refund is not affected this deci- general theory processed by Department. behind the taxes should be sales and use sion and (1958) (admission S.D. binding party)). on fact of controverted

brief SD FELTROP, Appellant, Beverly OF DAKOTA DEPARTMENT SOUTH SERVICES, Appellee. SOCIAL

No. 19669. Dakota. Supreme of South Court Briefs 1997. on Jan. Considered Feb. Decided Schweiger, City, for Rapid appel-

Todd A. lant. Barnett, General, Attorney

Mark Joan W. General, Pierre, Baker, Attorney P. Assistant appellee. SABERS, Justice. Recipient 1] Aid to Families with (AFDC)

Dependent and Medicaid Children ineligible ruled for one month benefits was household’s resources exceeded because her Departs maximum limit. resource ment of Services and the circuit court Social savings granddaughter’s that a account held injury a a re- settlement was pur- household for source available eligibility. poses of AFDC and Medicaid We affirm.

FACTS (Feltrop) Beverly Feltrop received

[If two AFDC Medicaid benefits over eligibili- For years dispute arose. before this her, determination, ty her household includes Feltrop is grandson, granddaughter. guardian granddaughter her admin- $1,354.47 per- from a savings ister a account injury suit. sonal court-approved [¶ 3] The settlement May began to receive Feltrop of 1992. January AFDC Medicaid benefits always reported the Although Feltrop documents, it was AFDC account on relevant was conducted supervisory not until a review

Case Details

Case Name: In Re the Sales & Use Tax Refund Request of Media One, Inc., License No. 51-0180701-ST

Court Name: South Dakota Supreme Court

Date Published: Feb 19, 1997

Citation: 559 N.W.2d 875

Docket Number: 19401, 19411

Court Abbreviation: S.D.