AUTHORITY: section 94.530, RSMo 1978. C.S.T. regulation 540-4A originally filed Dec. 31, 1975, effective Jan. 10, 1976. Amended: Filed Sept. 7, 1984, effective Jan. 12, 1985. Rescinded: Filed Aug. 26, 2005, effective Feb. 28, 2006. Fabick and Co. v. Schaffner, 492 SW2d 737 (Mo. 1973). Jurisdictional arguments based upon lack of reciprocal benefit under city tax law are unavailing because the retailer is within the city imposing the tax and is the recipient of governmental services provided by the city. The contention that only a rebuttable presumption was intended by the phrase “shall be deemed to be consummated at the place of business of the retailer;” was rejected. The obvious purpose of the premium was to fix the taxable situs of transactions which might have a nexus with more than one municipality. City sales tax of Jefferson City, like to state sales tax, is a gross receipts tax, not a transactions tax. Due to similarity with rule, see also section 94.540.5., RSMo.