Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 12, § 10-111.100
PURPOSE: Section 144.020.1(1), RSMo, taxes the retail sale of tangible personal property. Section 144.030.2(2), RSMo, exempts materials that become a component part or ingredient of new personal property which is intended to be sold ultimately at retail. Sections 144.030.2(4) and (5), RSMo, exempt certain machinery, equipment, and parts for replacement or for a new or expanded plant. This rule explains the taxation rules for commercial printers and what elements must be met to qualify for these exemptions. This rule does not address the exemption relating to newspaper publishing contained in section 144.030.2(8), RSMo, or the exemption relating to advertising contained in section 144.034, RSMo.
(3) Basic Application of Tax.
(B) Ingredients and component parts—Purchases of material and supplies such as paper and ink may be purchased tax exempt by printers as ingredients or component parts under section 144.030.2(2), RSMo.
mixture are exempt, including:
press to keep the non-image area clean of ink while printing;
drying out;
and
other printed material.
(E) Supplies and Parts.
cycle are not exempt as machinery and equipment or parts.
cycle are exempt as parts of machinery and equipment.
of machinery and equipment.
as machinery and equipment or parts.
overspray and equipment are not exempt as ingredients or component parts if used as a cleaning solvent separate from the ink. If mixed with the ink, then the mineral spirits are exempt as ingredients or component parts.
(4) Examples.
AUTHORITY: section 144.270, RSMo 2000.* Original rule filed Oct. 11, 2001, effective April 30, 2002. Emergency amendment filed Aug. 14, 2007, effective Aug. 28, 2007, expired Feb. 23, 2008. Amended: Filed Aug. 14, 2007, effective Feb. 29, 2008.
*Original authority: 144.270, RSMo 1939, amended 1941, 1943, 1945, 1947, 1955, 1961. Ovid Bell Press, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 45 S.W.3d 880 (Mo. banc 2001). The court held that materials used by a printer, including film used to produce plates, are exempt as materials purchased for resale if title to the materials passes to the customer as part of the printing contract. The key to determining the passage of title is the intent of the parties, as evidenced by all relevant facts, including custom or usage of trade. Walsworth Publishing Co., Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 935 S.W.2d 39 (Mo. banc 1996). The taxpayer used phototypesetting paper to produce yearbooks for schools and commercial customers. The issue was whether the phototypesetting paper qualified as equipment under section 144.030.2(4), RSMo. The court ruled that “equipment” must be a fixed asset other than land and buildings for purposes of business and accounting practices that has some degree of permanence to the business and contributes to multiple processing cycles over time. The phototypesetting paper was not equipment because it benefited only one production cycle over time. K & A Litho Process, Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue, 653 S.W.2d 195 (Mo. banc 1983). The issue was whether the sale of lithographic work was the sale of nontaxable service or the taxable sale of tangible personal property. The court found that the lithographic process was the nontaxable sale of technical professional service and that the transfer of ownership to tangible personal property was only incidental to the provision of service. The taxpayer received a color transparency from an outside source such as a printer, advertising agency or publishing house and then created a film separation and a color key that could then be used to print the transparency on paper for distribution. The color separation and the color key were merely the means of conveying the nontaxable professional technical service. Heidelberg Central, Inc. v. Director Dept. of Revenue, 476 S.W.2d 502 (Mo. 1972). The taxpayer was a commercial printer that purchased printing presses to print business forms, stationery, advertising, postcards, bulletins, calendars etc. The court held that the taxpayer’s purchases qualified for the machinery and equipment exemption in section 144.030.2(4), RSMo. The court stated that the taxpayer’s process qualified as “manufacturing.” The printer produced new and different articles from raw materials by the use of machinery, labor and skill, and it produced products for sale that had an intrinsic and merchantable value and were in forms suitable for new uses.