KANSAS OFFICE of
  REVISOR of STATUTES

  

Home >> Statutes >> Back


Click to open printable format in new window.Printable Format
 | Next

79-3701. Title of act. This act shall be known as the "Kansas compensating tax."

History: L. 1937, ch. 375, ยง 1; May 30.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Sales and use taxes apply to purchases of equipment for municipal utility. City of Chanute v. Commission of Revenue and Taxation, 156 K. 538, 539, 542, 134 P.2d 672.

2. Purpose and history of act and amendments discussed. Natural Gas Pipeline Co. v. Commission of Revenue and Taxation, 163 K. 458, 459, 463, 183 P.2d 234.

3. History, intent and purpose of act discussed; exemptions; test to determine taxable transactions. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. State Commission of Revenue and Taxation, 168 K. 227, 228, 230, 231, 212 P.2d 363.

4. Telephone property purchased outside state held taxable; exemptions; act construed. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. State Commission of Revenue and Taxation, 168 K. 227, 228, 230, 231, 212 P.2d 363.

5. Act supplemental and complementary to Kansas retailers' sales tax act (79-3601 et seq.). Consumers Co-operative Ass'n v. State Comm. of Rev. and Taxation, 174 K. 461, 464, 467, 256 P.2d 850.

6. Purchases by private corporation for United States government; act inapplicable. General Motors Corporation v. State Comm. of Rev. & Taxation, 182 K. 237, 238, 320 P.2d 807.

7. Act constitutional; commerce clause of federal constitution not violated. Custom Built Homes Co. v. State Comm. of Rev. and Taxation, 184 K. 31, 32, 35, 41, 45, 334 P.2d 808.

8. Sales tax and compensating tax acts complementary, supplemental to one another; construed together. Custom Built Homes Co. v. State Comm. of Rev. and Taxation, 184 K. 31, 35, 41, 334 P.2d 808.

9. Sales tax statutes penal in nature; strictly construed in favor of taxpayer; not violative of commerce clause of U.S. Constitution. J. G. Masonry, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 235 K. 497, 500, 503, 508, 680 P.2d 291 (1984).

10. Cited; transfer of computer software to Bell for operating computerized electronic switching system as not subject to compensating tax examined. In re Tax Appeal of AT&T Technologies, Inc., 242 K. 554, 555, 749 P.2d 1033 (1988).

11. KDR's interpretation of 79-3606(kk) reasonable despite misreliance on "rule" published in information guide having no force or effect. In re Tax Appeal of Alsop Sand Co., Inc., 265 K. 510, 518, 962 P.2d 435 (1998).

12. BOTA decision affirmed that Intercard did not have substantial nexus within state to be subject to compensating use tax. In re Appeal of Intercard, Inc., 270 K. 346, 14 P.3d 1111 (2000).

13. Texas company responsible for payment of compensating use tax as its sales agents provided necessary nexus with Kansas. In re Tax Appeal of Family of Eagles, LTD, 275 K. 479, 66 P.3d 858 (2003).


 | Next


LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL
11/16/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
9/23/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
6/16/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
2/23/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda
1/7/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda

LCC Policies

COMMISSION ON INTERSTATE COOPERATION
6/29/2022 Meeting Notice Agenda

REVISOR OF STATUTES
2021 Interim Assignments
2022 Valid Section Numbers
Chapter 72 Statute Transfer List
Kansas School Equity & Enhancement Act
Gannon v. State
Information for Special Session 2021
General Information, Legal Analysis & Research
2022 Amended & Repealed Statutes
2021 Amended & Repealed Statutes
2020 Amended & repealed Statutes
2019 Amended & Repealed Statutes

USEFUL LINKS
Session Laws

 OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES
Kansas Legislature
Administrative Services
Division of Post Audit
Research Department