Spang Stores, Inc. v. Commonwealth

360 A.2d 180, 468 Pa. 63, 1976 Pa. LEXIS 659
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJuly 6, 1976
Docket7
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 360 A.2d 180 (Spang Stores, Inc. v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Spang Stores, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 360 A.2d 180, 468 Pa. 63, 1976 Pa. LEXIS 659 (Pa. 1976).

Opinions

[65]*65OPINION

JONES, Chief Justice.

Appellant, Spang Stores, Inc., appeals 1 the decision of the Commonwealth Court which appraised the actual value of the capital stock of the appellant for the year ended January 31, 1971, pursuant to the Capital Stock Tax,2 at $2,000,000. 17 Pa.Cmwlth. 448, 333 A.2d 493 (1975).

The taxpayer is a Pennsylvania Corporation engaged in the operation of fifty-nine retail drugstores under the name Sun Drug and five discount stores under the name of Eiben & Irr, all located in western Pennsylvania, with a major concentration of stores in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area.

Taxpayer timely filed its capital stock tax return for the fiscal year ended January 31, 1971, with a self-appraised actual value of its capital stock at $1,700,000, and a tax liability of $11,900. The Department of Revenue, pursuant to Section 801(d) of the Fiscal Code, reappraised the value of taxpayer’s capital stock at $3,000,000, resulting in a tax liability of $21,000. Act of April 9, 1929, P.L. 343, Art. VIII, § 801, as amended, 72 P.S. 801 (1949). After this valuation was approved by the Auditor General, the taxpayer filed a petition for resettlement. As a result of that hearing, the Department resettled the taxpayer’s capital stock tax liability to $19,600, based on a valuation of taxpayer’s capital stock at $2,800,000. Taxpayer then filed with the Board of Finance and Revenue a petition for review of the action taken on its petition for resettlement. Following a hearing, the Board resettled the account and appraised the [66]*66value of taxpayer’s capital stock at $2,400,000, with a resulting tax liability of $16,800. Taxpayer’s appeal to the Commonwealth Court for a hearing de novo 3 under Section 1104 of the Fiscal Code followed. Act of April 9, 1929, P.L. 343, as amended, 72 P.S. § 1104 (Supp.1976-1977). The Commonwealth Court determined that the taxpayer’s capital stock should be valued at $2,000,000. This appeal followed. Whether the Commonwealth Court properly valued the taxpayer’s capital stock is the issue to which we now turn.

Under the Act of June 1, 1889, P.L. 420, § 21, as amended, 72 P.S. § 1871(a), appellant is required to make an annual payment to the Commonwealth of a tax at the rate of “five mills upon each dollar of the actual value of its whole capital stock.” The tax is to be accompanied by a report setting forth information concerning the selling price of the taxpayer’s stock during the year and the business operations and financial structure of the taxpayer. The report is also to include a valuation of the taxpayer’s capital stock at its actual value in cash at the close of the tax year as made by the officers of the taxpayer. This valuation is to be made after considering (1) the average selling price of the taxpayer’s stock during the year; (2) the value indicated or measured by the taxpayer’s net earnings or by the amount of profit made and either declared in dividends, expended in improvements or carried into surplus or a sinking fund; and (3) the actual value indicated or measured by the intrinsic value of the taxpayer’s tangible property and assets and by the value of its good will, franchises and privileges, as revealed by the material results of their exercise, considering also the amount of the taxpayer’s indebtedness. Act of June 1, 1889, P.L. 420, § 20, as amended, 72 P.S. §§ 1901,1902.

[67]*67Appellant’s current assets on January 31, 1971, consisted of cash in the amount of $608,625, accounts receivable of $578,097, merchandise inventories of $6,102,-294, and $116,801 of prepaid expenses. These items result in total current assets of $7,405,817. In addition, appellant’s equipment and leasehold improvements on a cost basis with allowances for depreciation and amortization amounted to $1,801,563. The total assets were $9,212,982.

Appellant’s current liabilities totaled $2,919,195, and it was obligated on a demand loan with a remaining balance of $1,579,899. The book value of the shareholder’s equity as of January 31, 1971, was $4,713,888. None of appellant’s stock was issued or sold during the fiscal year ended January 31, 1971. Appellant’s earnings and dividend history for the five fiscal years ended January 31,1971, was as follows:

Book Net Income After
Year Ended January 31 Federal Taxes Dividends Cash Stock Capital Stock Valuation As Filed As Settled
FIVE YEARS ENDED JANUARY 31, 1971:
1967 $ 38,830 $ 48,574 -0-2,800,000 2,800,000
1968 72,887 -0-—0-2,800,000 2,800,000
1969 125,518 -0-—0-2,800,000 2,800,000
1970 28,566 -0--0-1.700.000 2,800,000
1971 32,466 -0--0-1.700.000 3,000,000
TOTALS 298,267 48,574 -0-
FIVE YEAR AVERAGE
1967-1971 $ 59,653 $ 9,715

We have provided the pertinent financial information which lead to the Commonwealth Court’s decision in this matter. It is apparent, of course, and the Commonwealth focused on this factor in its valuation of appellant’s capital stock, that under the facts present here the intrinsic value of appellant’s assets is of primary consid[68]*68eration in valuing appellant’s capital stock. This situation led the lower court to conclude that under such circumstances it was proper to arrive at a value by considering the third statutory measure of value after taking into consideration the net earnings of the corporation. Act of June i, 1889, P.L. 420, § 20, as amended, 72 P.S. §§ 1901, 1902. We agree with this conclusion for any other would lead to an improper valuation without considering all of the pertinent statutory measures.

We have frequently pointed out that the capital stock tax is actually a tax upon the properties and assets of a corporation: Commonwealth v. Philadelphia Market Street Subway-Elevated Railway Company, 408 Pa. 357, 184 A.2d 483 (1962); Commonwealth v. Central Railroad Company of Pennsylvania, 403 Pa. 419, 169 A. 2d 878 (1961); Commonwealth v. Sunbury Converting Works, 286 Pa. 545, 134 A. 438 (1926); Commonwealth v. Fall Brook Railway Company, 188 Pa. 199, 41 A. 606 (1898); and that valuation of the capital stock of a corporation is a matter of judgment, Commonwealth v. Progress Manufacturing Company, 389 Pa. 600, 133 A.2d 814 (1957); Commonwealth v. Pomeroy’s, Inc., 344 Pa. 538, 26 A.2d 197 (1942); Commonwealth v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 297 Pa. 308, 147 A. 242 (1929). As these latter cases indicate, accounting figures are not determinative of valuation; and, book values are not evidence of. actual value for capital stock tax purposes. Commonwealth v. Gimbel Brothers, Inc., 18 Dauph. 385 (Pa.1915).

As one commentator has noted:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

American Life & Accident Insurance Co. of Kentucky v. Commonwealth
173 S.W.3d 910 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 2004)
AMERICAN LIFE & ACC. INS. CO. v. Com.
173 S.W.3d 910 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 2004)
Commonwealth v. Penn Square Management Corp.
394 A.2d 1095 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
Rest Haven-Chestnut Hill, Inc. v. Commonwealth
385 A.2d 609 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
Commonwealth v. After Six, Inc.
382 A.2d 983 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
Commonwealth v. S. Frieder & Sons Co.
367 A.2d 351 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1976)
Spang Stores, Inc. v. Commonwealth
360 A.2d 180 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
360 A.2d 180, 468 Pa. 63, 1976 Pa. LEXIS 659, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spang-stores-inc-v-commonwealth-pa-1976.