Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue

CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 27, 2015
Docket91072-3
StatusPublished

This text of Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue (Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, (Wash. 2015).

Opinion

This opinion was flied for record

~~5 o ar t Supreme Court Clerk

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

STEVEN KLEIN, INC.~ dba KLEIN ) HONDA, ) No. 91072-3 ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) EnBanc ) STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ) ) Filed AUG 2 7 2015 Respondent. ) )

OWENS, J. - Klein Honda is a Honda dealership. It purchases vehicles from

Honda at wholesale and sells them at retail. From time to time, Honda offers a

"dealer cash" incentive program for its dealerships. Under that program, dealerships

can earn dealer cash (i.e., a specific amount of extra money) if they sell specific

Honda models during specific times and comply with other terms and conditions.

This case requires us to determine whether Klein Honda's dealer cash earnings

are taxable. We hold that they are. The catchall business and occupation (B&O) tax

provision applies to other or additional business activities that do not constitute retail

sales. By participating in the dealer cash program, Klein Honda received additional, Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep 't of Revenue No. 91072-3

separate income beyond its ordinary retail sales. That constitutes an additional

taxable business activity under the catchall provision. Although dealer cash would

not be taxable under one of the Washington State Department of Revenue's

(Department) regulations if it represented a "bona fide discount" on Klein Honda's

wholesale purchase ofvehicles, former WAC 458-20-108(1), (5) (1987), dealer cash

is not a bona fide discount because Klein Honda does not purchase vehicles from

Honda subject to a dealer cash discount. Dealer cash payments are not necessarily

quantified or even knowable at the time that Klein Honda purchases vehicles from

Honda. Thus, Klein Honda's dealer cash is taxable.

FACTS

Klein Honda is a Honda franchisee car dealership in Everett, Washington.

Klein Honda's business relationship with Honda is governed by a "Sales and Service

Agreement" between them. Admin. Record (AR) at 20, 309. Under that agreement,

Klein Honda purchases cars from Honda at wholesale and then sells those cars to

customers at retail.

Klein Honda has "little discretion over [its] inventory." !d. at 20. "Honda

sends [Klein Honda] a presumptive order," and Klein Honda "may remove vehicles

from the order, but it cannot add them." !d. Once Honda ships vehicles to Klein

Honda, it issues an invoice to Klein Honda for each vehicle.

2 Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep 't of Revenue No. 91072-3

"The invoice states a price, and [Klein Honda] remits that amount to Honda."

Id. A typical invoice also states, '"Dealer's invoice may not reflect dealer's ultimate

vehicle cost given any rebates, allowances, collections, discounts, holdback,

incentives, etc."' Id.; see, e.g., id. at 765. A "holdback," for example, is a credit that

Honda issues to Klein Honda the month following Klein Honda's wholesale purchase

of a vehicle. Honda provides this holdback credit, along with other similar credits,

regardless of whether Klein Honda sells the vehicle-they are an adjustment to Klein

Honda's purchase price of the vehicle. "The ... credits are quantified at or about the

time the vehicle is purchased by the dealership and delivered by the manufacturer."

Id. at 20. Some of the credits that Honda provides are specifically listed on each

vehicle's invoice. "The Department recognizes that [those] credits reduce the dealer's

purchase price for the vehicle." Id. All payments from Klein Honda to Honda for

new vehicles and all credits from Honda to Klein Honda are reflected in a monthly

balance forward statement.

From time to time, Honda also offers dealer cash incentive programs to

dealerships. The dealer cash incentive program is designed to stimulate sales of

specific Honda models during specific periods of time to compete with rival car

manufacturers. As the general manager of Klein Honda testified,

Dealer cash is a means by which American Honda kind of puts more momentum behind a particular vehicle line or model. And when I say that, I mean that what they do is they adjust the vehicle's presence in the marketplace, usually as a reaction to competitive action, which typically

3 Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep 't of Revenue No. 91072-3

would be rebates, consumer rebates, and allowing the Honda dealers to remain in a competitive position on that particular model.

Verbatim Tr. of Proceedings (VTP) at 50. When Honda decides to offer a dealer cash

incentive program, it sends a marketing bulletin to dealerships informing them what

they need to do to earn dealer cash. For example, on October 3, 2006, Honda sent out

a marketing bulletin for dealer cash on the 2006 Honda Pilot, informing dealerships

that they could receive "$2,500 Dealer Cash on eligible 2006 Pilot models" by selling

the cars between October 3 and October 31, 2006, provided the dealerships complied

with detailed rules, terms, and conditions. AR at 754. Among other terms and

conditions, dealerships could not sell the car to an entity that would resell the vehicle

and they were required to perform a self-audit at the end of every dealer cash program

and verify by "signed affidavit" that they met the eligibility requirements. !d. at 757.

Klein Honda's general manager characterized Honda's dealer cash incentive

program as a "conditional offer," and he agreed it was conditional "because you don't

get the dealer cash unless you sell a particular vehicle model during a particular time."

VTP at 62. Klein Honda's owner, Steven Klein, also recognized the detailed and

conditional nature of the offer, saying that "this is our contract with the factory to get

our money, and if we don't do everything to the letter of these bulletins they can say,

we're not .going to give you the dealer cash." AR at 100. If Klein Honda meets all

the requirements of Honda's dealer cash offer, Honda issues a credit in the monthly

balance forward statement, and Honda also sends a separate "miscellaneous billing

4 Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep 't of Revenue No. 91072-3

invoice" detailing how much dealer cash Klein Honda earned for a time period. Id. at

779 (formatting omitted). "Klein Honda does not account for dealer cash in its

accounting records as a reduction in the cost of goods sold." Id. at 26.

Klein Honda earned $1,037,450 in dealer cash from Honda during the audit

period of January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2006. The Department assessed Klein

Honda $16,963 in B&O taxes under the catchall "Service and Other Activities" B&O

tax category. Id. at 795. Klein Honda paid the assessment but petitioned the

Department's appeals division for a refund. The appeals division ultimately upheld

the assessment.

Klein Honda appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals (Board), and the Board

affirmed the Department's assessment. In its conclusions of law, the Board stated that

a "taxpayer engaged in any business activity not specifically set forth in [the

provisions regarding specific taxable business activities] shall be taxed at the rate of

1.5 percent." Id. at 26. The Board concluded that the dealer cash credits were taxable

as business revenue.

Klein Honda appealed to the Thurston County Superior Court. The superior

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

Related

Time Oil Co. v. State
483 P.2d 628 (Washington Supreme Court, 1971)
OLYMPIC TUG & BARGE v. Dept. of Revenue
259 P.3d 338 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2011)
Simpson Inv. Co. v. State, Dept. of Revenue
3 P.3d 741 (Washington Supreme Court, 2000)
DOT FOODS v. Washington Dept. of Revenue
215 P.3d 185 (Washington Supreme Court, 2009)
State Ex Rel. Stiner v. Yelle
25 P.2d 91 (Washington Supreme Court, 1933)
Dot Foods, Inc. v. Department of Revenue
166 Wash. 2d 912 (Washington Supreme Court, 2009)
Olympic Tug & Barge, Inc. v. Department of Revenue
163 Wash. App. 298 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2011)
Steven Klein, Inc. v. Department of Revenue
336 P.3d 663 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Steven Klein, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steven-klein-inc-v-dept-of-revenue-wash-2015.