Ark. Code Ann. » Title 26 Chapter 52
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (2026)

Direct payment of tax by consumer-user — New and used motor vehicles, trailers, or semitrailers — Definition

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

History. Acts 1941, No. 386, § 3; 1945, No. 64, § 1; 1957, No. 19, §§ 1, 4; 1959, No. 260, § 1; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 84-1903, 84-3108n; Acts 1989 (3rd Ex. Sess.), No. 9, § 1; 1991, No. 3, § 6; 1993, No. 285, § 8; 1993, No. 297, § 8; 1995, No. 268, § 6; 1995, No. 390, § 1; 1995, No. 437, § 1; 1995, No. 1013, § 1; 1997, No. 1232, §§ 1, 2; 2001, No. 1047, § 1; 2001, No. 1834, § 1; 2009, No. 655, §§ 21-23; 2011, No. 753, § 1; 2011, No. 983, § 10; 2019, No. 315, § 2996; 2019, No. 910, §§ 3873-3876.

A.C.R.C. Notes. Acts 1991, No. 3, § 8, provides, in part, that the Director of the Department of Finance and Administration is authorized to adopt an alternative method for determining the total consideration for the sale of new or used motor vehicles, trailers, or semitrailers under this section. See § 26-52-514 concerning such alternative method.

Amendments. The 2009 amendment rewrote (a); deleted (e)(2) and redesignated the remaining text accordingly; substituted “new or used trailer or semitrailer” for “trailer” in (g)(2)(B); and made minor stylistic changes.

The 2011 amendment by No. 753 substituted “four thousand dollars ($4,000)” for “two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500)” in (b)(1)(B).

The 2011 amendment by No. 983 rewrote (a)(4)(B).

The 2019 amendment by No. 315 substituted “rules” for “regulations” in (c).

The 2019 amendment by No. 910 substituted “Secretary of the Department of Finance and Administration” for “Director of the Department of Finance and Administration” in (a)(1); and substituted “secretary” and “secretary’s” for “director” and “director’s” in (a)(2), twice in (a)(4)(B), in (g)(1)(B)-(C), and (g)(2)(B).

Cross References. Refund of sales tax on vehicles returned as defective, § 26-52-515.

Research References

U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.

Legislative Survey, Taxation, 8 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 601.

U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev.

Survey of Legislation, 2001 Arkansas General Assembly, Tax Law, 24 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 613.

Case Notes

In General.

Since this section provided who is to pay the tax, a car dealer is not required to tell every purchaser who would pay the tax or have the contract subjected to rescission. Lowell Perkins Agency, Inc. v. Jacobs, 250 Ark. 952, 469 S.W.2d 89 (1971).

Trial court did not err in denying car manufacturer a refund or deduction of the pro rata portion of gross receipts tax related to bad debts arising out of the sale and financing of motor vehicles as the car manufacturer was not a “taxpayer” for the purposes of the Arkansas Bad Debt Statute, § 26-52-309; for the purposes of the motor vehicle gross receipts tax, the person liable to remit the tax was the consumer. DaimlerChrysler Servs. N. Am., LLC v. Weiss, 360 Ark. 188, 200 S.W.3d 405 (2004).

Trial court erred in finding that a corporation was a “taxpayer” for the purposes of § 26-52-309, commonly known as the Bad Debt Statute, and in granting a refund or deduction of the pro rata portion of gross receipts tax related to bad debts arising out of the sale and financing of motor vehicles in Arkansas; it was possible to be a taxpayer for one kind of tax, while not a taxpayer for another kind of tax. Weiss v. American Honda Fin. Corp., 360 Ark. 208, 200 S.W.3d 381 (2004).

Automobiles.

Automobiles, whether old or new, sold subsequent to the effective date of Acts 1935, No. 233, were subject to the tax, unless received as part of the purchase price. S.R. Thomas Auto Co. v. Wiseman, 192 Ark. 584, 93 S.W.2d 138 (1936) (decision under prior law).

This section relates to the method of collection and does not impose a use tax; therefore, sale of automobiles completed in another state and brought by owner into this state was not taxable under this section. Cook v. Southeast Ark. Transp. Co., 211 Ark. 831, 202 S.W.2d 772 (1947) (decision prior to enactment of § 26-53-101 et seq.).

Legislative Intent.

The amendment of subsection (b) of this section by Acts 1995, No. 268 was not an attempt by the legislature to retroactively change subsection (a) of this section or § 26-53-126(a). Pledger v. Mid-State Constr. & Materials, 325 Ark. 388, 925 S.W.2d 412 (1996).

Trailers.

There is no statutory authority to collect sales tax directly from purchaser of house trailer used as home and not required to be licensed. Cheney v. Frederick, 239 Ark. 466, 390 S.W.2d 121 (1965).

Cited: U-Drive-'Em Serv. Co. v. Hardin, 205 Ark. 501, 169 S.W.2d 584 (1943); Comm'r of Revenues v. Belote, 226 Ark. 295, 289 S.W.2d 665 (1956); Republic Steel Corp. v. McCastlain, 240 Ark. 979, 403 S.W.2d 90 (1966); Martin v. Couey Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 308 Ark. 325, 824 S.W.2d 832 (1992); Pledger v. Brunner & Lay, Inc., 308 Ark. 512, 825 S.W.2d 599.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2024 · leading case: Arkansas Dep't of Fin. & Admin. v. Trotter Ford, Inc. & Trotter Auto, Inc., D/B/A Trotter Toyota, 2024 Ark. 31, 685 S.W.3d 889.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Arkansas Dep't of Fin. & Admin. v. Trotter Ford, Inc. & Trotter Auto, Inc., D/B/A Trotter Toyota, 2024 Ark. 31, 685 S.W.3d 889. · cites it 18× “See Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (a)(1) (Repl. 2020).”
Daimlerchrysler Servs. North Am., LLC v. Weiss, 200 S.W.3d 405 (Ark. 2004). · cites it 12× “And though the statute does not expressly exempt motor vehicle sales, some meager doubt is raised because other statutes do treat payment of the sales tax on motor vehicle sales differently from sales of ordinary tangible property.”
Weiss v. Am. Honda Fin. Corp., 200 S.W.3d 381 (Ark. 2004). · cites it 4× “Section 26-52-510(a)(1)(A) (Repl.1997) provides: The tax levied by this chapter and all other gross receipts taxes levied by the state in respect to the sale of new or used motor vehicles, trailers, or semitrailers required to be licensed in this state shall be paid by the…”
Citifinancial Retail Servs. Div. of Citicorp Trust Bank, FSB v. Weiss, 271 S.W.3d 494 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 4× “” DaimlerChrysler and Honda each argued that it effectively paid the sales tax, because it paid the retailers (sellers) the full of amount of the financed purchases, including the sales tax.”
Martin v. Couey Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 824 S.W.2d 832 (Ark. 1992). · cites it 4× “Couey requested an administrative hearing and argued the consumer, rather than the dealer, was liable for gross receipts taxes under Ark.Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (1987) and that a jeopardy assessment could only be instituted against a party responsible for paying the tax, relying…”
Pledger v. Mid-State Constr. & Materials, Inc., 925 S.W.2d 412 (Ark. 1996). · cites it 2× “See Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (d) and § 26-53-126(f).”
Kenneth D. Stuart James Greenhaw Elizabeth Jessup Amber Wooldridge Kevin Lightburn Kalvin Henderson Cbc Vision, LLC Timothy Tyler Gardner Jamshid Mirtalipov & Garrett Taylor v. Larry Walther, in His Off. Capacity as Sec'y of Arkansas Dep't of Fin. & Admin., 2024 Ark. 41. · cites it 2× “Appellants then appealed to the circuit court for further review, and it concluded that appellants’ counsel would be disqualified from representing them further. Kenneth’s and Greenhaw’s sales tax protests were the first to proceed to the administrative hearing, so much of the…”
United States Ex Rel. Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota, 105 F.3d 1552 (8th Cir. 1997). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 . This tax is "paid by the consumer to the Director of the Department of Finance and Administration instead of being collected by the dealer or seller, .”
Davis v. State, 228 S.W.3d 529 (Ark. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “1 For instance, Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (b)(l)(B) (Supp.”
Pledger V. Brunner & Lay, Inc., 825 S.W.2d 599 (Ark. 1992). · cites it 5× “The exemption from the State sales tax was found at Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (b) before its amendment by 1991 Act No.”
Citifinancial Retail Servs. v. Weiss, 271 S.W.3d 494 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 4× “" DaimlerChrysler and Honda each argued that it effectively paid the sales tax, because it paid the retailers (sellers) the full of amount of the financed purchases, including the sales tax.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510(a)(1)(A): 3 cases
Daimlerchrysler Servs. North Am., LLC v. Weiss, 200 S.W.3d 405 (Ark. 2004). “And though the statute does not expressly exempt motor vehicle sales, some meager doubt is raised because other statutes do treat payment of the sales tax on motor vehicle sales differently from sales of ordinary tangible property.”
Weiss v. Am. Honda Fin. Corp., 200 S.W.3d 381 (Ark. 2004). “Section 26-52-510(a)(1)(A) (Repl.1997) provides: The tax levied by this chapter and all other gross receipts taxes levied by the state in respect to the sale of new or used motor vehicles, trailers, or semitrailers required to be licensed in this state shall be paid by the…”
Citifinancial Retail Servs. v. Weiss, 271 S.W.3d 494 (Ark. 2008). “" DaimlerChrysler and Honda each argued that it effectively paid the sales tax, because it paid the retailers (sellers) the full of amount of the financed purchases, including the sales tax.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510(a)(l)(A): 2 cases
Weiss v. Am. Honda Fin. Corp., 200 S.W.3d 381 (Ark. 2004). “Section 26-52-510(a)(1)(A) (Repl.1997) provides: The tax levied by this chapter and all other gross receipts taxes levied by the state in respect to the sale of new or used motor vehicles, trailers, or semitrailers required to be licensed in this state shall be paid by the…”
Daimlerchrysler Servs. North Am., LLC v. Weiss, 200 S.W.3d 405 (Ark. 2004). “And though the statute does not expressly exempt motor vehicle sales, some meager doubt is raised because other statutes do treat payment of the sales tax on motor vehicle sales differently from sales of ordinary tangible property.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510(b)(2): 1 case
Pledger V. Brunner & Lay, Inc., 825 S.W.2d 599 (Ark. 1992). “The exemption from the State sales tax was found at Ark. Code Ann. § 26-52-510 (b) before its amendment by 1991 Act No.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.