Nontaxable truck or taxable tractor?

From an NTEA member Is there any clear guidance to determine if a vehicle rated 33,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW) should be treated as a nontaxable truck or a taxable tractor? I believe the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was reviewing this issue to provide more direction. Are there any new developments? There has been some progress on this issue, but there is still no clear, objective standard to guide your determination. A tractor is defined in Treasury Regulations as "a highway vehicle primarily designed to tow a vehicle, such as a trailer or semitrailer, but does not carry cargo on the same chassis as the engine." See Treasury Regulation Section 145.4051-1(e)(1). This regulation also provides that "[a] vehicle equipped with air brakes and/or towing package will be presumed to be primarily designed as a tractor." In addition, it gives the circumstances in which incomplete chassis-cabs may be treated as tractors. The distinction between a tractor and a truck chassis is important because tractors are taxable, but truck chassis suitable for use with vehicles rated 33,000 pounds GVW or below are not subject to tax. Despite the definition describing a tractor as a vehicle that "does not carry cargo on the same chassis as the engine," the IRS rejected a literal interpretation of this language. In other words, it refused taxpayer arguments that vehicles with chassis carrying any amount of cargo cannot be treated as tractors for purposes of Section 4051 tax. The IRS stated such a position would render the primary design test meaningless (i.e., taxpayer arguments would result in a vehicle with incidental or secondary cargo-carrying capacity being treated as a truck, even if it was primarily designed to tow.) See Technical Advice Memorandum 200341003 (May 16, 2003); Technical Advice Memorandum 200222002 (Jan. 16, 2002); Technical Advice Memorandum 200025006 (March 2, 2000); Technical Advice Memorandum 200025007 (March 2, 2000). See also Letter Ruling 200119024 (Feb. 7, 2001), rejecting a taxpayer's argument that certain storage boxes on the vehicle required it to be treated as a truck. In each of these recent rulings, the IRS concluded the vehicle at issue was a truck, not a tractor, despite the fact that the vehicle had some cargo-carrying capacity. These rulings were very fact-specific and did not offer any easily applied test to determine the primary design of a vehicle that can carry cargo and tow. The truck versus tractor issue was accepted by the IRS as part of its Industry Issue Resolution (IIR) Program, which seeks to provide guidance on burdensome or frequently disputed issues. Guidance resulting from the IIR Program was a 2004 revenue ruling on the subject. See Revenue Ruling 2004-80, 2004-32 I.R.B. 164 (Aug. 9, 2004). Revenue Ruling 2004-80 retains a fact-specific approach for determining the primary design of a vehicle, meaning this issue will continue to be challenging for taxpayers. However, the Revenue Ruling does provide some general guidance on the application of the primary design test, and continues to reject the position that the presence of a limited amount of cargo-carrying capacity of the chassis renders the vehicle a truck rather than a tractor. In Revenue Ruling 2004-80, the IRS states, "[u]nder the primarily designed test, a vehicle that can both carry cargo on its chassis and tow a trailer is characterized as either a truck or tractor depending on which function is of greater importance." The IRS goes on to state that the primary design test is determined by looking at a vehicle's physical characteristics, "such as the vehicle's capacity to tow a vehicle, carry cargo, and operate (including brake) safely when towing or carrying a cargo." The Ruling also notes that a vehicle's cargo-carrying capacity is based on its GVW and how the bed or platform is configured. Similarly, a vehicle's towing capacity is based on its GVW and gross combined weight (GCW), and if it is configured for towing a semitrailer or trailer. In the Revenue Ruling, the IRS determined the vehicle at issue was a taxable tractor, and concluded its physical characteristics increased its capacity to tow to the detriment of its capacity to carry cargo. Accordingly, the IRS determined the vehicle's primary design was for towing. In addition to the Revenue Ruling (and the rulings cited above), you should be aware of other recent tractor-related rulings. In Letter Rulings 200221019 (Feb. 14, 2002) and 200237002 (April 26, 2002), certain motorhome and/or toterhome vehicles with towing packages were presumed to be tractors. However, the IRS determined this presumption was rebutted because the body was primarily designed for living quarters and therefore exempt from tax under IRC Section 4053. (In these rulings, the IRS separately addresses the issue of chassis taxability.) Also, in 2004, the 11th Circuit Court reversed a lower court decision ruling that certain toter vehicles (used to tow or pull manufactured homes from the manufacturing plant to the retail dealer) were taxable tractors. The 11th Circuit Court, focusing on the statutory definition of a tractor, ruled the vehicles were not tractors subject to Section 4051 tax. Under the statute, Section 4051 tax applies to "[t]ractors of the kind chiefly used for highway transportation in combination with a trailer or semitrailer." See I.R.C. Section 4051(a)(1)(E). The court noted the IRS had admitted the vehicles at issue were used solely for transporting manufactured homes and were not capable of towing semitrailers or trailers. Thus, the court said although the toter vehicles satisfied the definition of a tractor set forth in the Treasury Regulations, such vehicles were not taxable under the statute. See Horton Homes, Inc. v. United States, 357 F.3d 1209 (11th Cir. 2004). Because the truck versus tractor determination continues to be highly fact-specific, you should consult your tax counsel for the proper treatment of vehicles equipped to tow and carry cargo. IMPORTANT NOTE: This document reflects the FET as of 11/1/2004. Transactions prior to this time may be subject to different rules because of changes in the FET Regulations, Statutory Amendments and IRS Rulings issued subsequent to the time of such earlier transactions. Similarly, transactions entered into after 11/1/2004 may be subject to different rules. It is, therefore, essential that users of the outline consult with their tax advisers before relying upon it. Also, users should recognize that IRS Letter Rulings referred to in these materials are binding only on the taxpayers to whom they were issued and only serve as an indication of the IRS's position on any issue.

Nontaxable truck or taxable tractor?

Recommended Articles

Can transportation/delivery charges be excluded from FET?

FET on parts and accessories

Pulsating brake lights: Know who can – and can’t – legally install them