Amendments.
The 2009 amendment inserted “and” at the end of (a)(2).
The 2017 amendment substituted “One dollar and twenty-six cents ($1.26)” for “Two dollars ($2.00)” in (a)(1); and substituted “Twenty and six-tenths cents (20.6¢)” for “Twenty-one cents (21¢)” in (a)(2) and (a)(3)(A).
Effective Dates.
Acts 2017, No. 141, § 63, as amended by Acts 2017, No. 596, §
1: “Sections 2 through 61 of this act are effective for tax years beginning on and after January 1, 2018.”
Case Notes
Constitutionality.
A retail dealer of soft drinks had standing to challenge the constitutionality of this section as an illegal exaction, notwithstanding that the tax imposed by the statute only applies to distributors, manufacturers, and wholesale dealers, because it had paid and would continue to pay the full amount of the tax, which its distributor passed on to it in a separately itemized charge on its sales invoices. Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Weiss, 338 Ark. 9, 991 S.W.2d 536 (1999).
In General.
The tax imposed by this section is one on products, not individuals. Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Barclay, 345 Ark. 514, 49 S.W.3d 652 (2001).
It is clear from the context of §§ 26-57-901 and this section that two different products are taxed: this section specifically distinguishes syrups from powders in its imposition of taxes. Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Barclay, 345 Ark. 514, 49 S.W.3d 652 (2001).
This chapter does not treat retailers — or the distributors, wholesalers, or manufacturers — differently; all are taxed the same. It is the product that is taxed differently. Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Barclay, 345 Ark. 514, 49 S.W.3d 652 (2001).
Applicability.
All Arkansas licensed soft drink distributors, as the parties or sellers responsible for collecting the tax, have the option of (1) including the tax in the cost of the product or (2) separately stating the tax on the invoice or document of sale. Foxsmith, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 323 Ark. 13, 912 S.W.2d 923 (1996).
Retailers Subject to Tax.
The one “subject to” the tax means the one who must file a monthly return and remit the tax to the state. Foxsmith, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 323 Ark. 13, 912 S.W.2d 923 (1996).
Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Weiss, 991 S.W.2d 536 (Ark. 1999). · cites it 50דGhegan, an Arkansas Corporation, filed on behalf of itself and all taxpayers similarly situated an illegal-exaction action challenging the constitutionality of section 26-57-904 (Repl.1997) of the Arkansas Soft Drink Tax Act, which provides that: (a) There is hereby levied and…”
Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Barclay, 49 S.W.3d 652 (Ark. 2001). · cites it 30דArk.Code Ann. § 26-57-904 (Repl.1997) provides, in relevant part: (a) There is hereby levied and there shall be collected a tax upon every distributor, manufacturer, or wholesale dealer, to be calculated as follows: (1) Two dollars ($2.”
Foxsmith, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 912 S.W.2d 923 (Ark. 1996). “Specifically, Foxsmith references § 26-57-904(b)(2), which in relevant part provides that a retailer shall not be subject to this tax, if the retailer purchases soft drinks from a supplier licensed under § 26-57-909.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 26-57-904(a): 2 cases
Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Weiss, 991 S.W.2d 536 (Ark. 1999). “Ghegan, an Arkansas Corporation, filed on behalf of itself and all taxpayers similarly situated an illegal-exaction action challenging the constitutionality of section 26-57-904 (Repl.1997) of the Arkansas Soft Drink Tax Act, which provides that: (a) There is hereby levied and…”
Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Barclay, 49 S.W.3d 652 (Ark. 2001). “Ark.Code Ann. § 26-57-904 (Repl.1997) provides, in relevant part: (a) There is hereby levied and there shall be collected a tax upon every distributor, manufacturer, or wholesale dealer, to be calculated as follows: (1) Two dollars ($2.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 26-57-904(b)(2): 2 cases
Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Weiss, 991 S.W.2d 536 (Ark. 1999). “Ghegan, an Arkansas Corporation, filed on behalf of itself and all taxpayers similarly situated an illegal-exaction action challenging the constitutionality of section 26-57-904 (Repl.1997) of the Arkansas Soft Drink Tax Act, which provides that: (a) There is hereby levied and…”
Foxsmith, Inc. v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 912 S.W.2d 923 (Ark. 1996). “Specifically, Foxsmith references § 26-57-904(b)(2), which in relevant part provides that a retailer shall not be subject to this tax, if the retailer purchases soft drinks from a supplier licensed under § 26-57-909.”
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.