O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 48-5-5 (2019)

No situs status for foreign merchandise in transit and property with contract for commercial printing services

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Foreign merchandise in transit shall acquire no situs so as to become subject to ad valorem taxation by political subdivisions of this state in which the port of original entry or the port of export of such merchandise is located. Such property shall not acquire situs by virtue of the fact that while in the warehouse the property is assembled, bound, joined, processed, disassembled, divided, cut, broken in bulk, relabeled, or repackaged. The grant of “no situs” status shall be liberally construed to effect the purposes of this Code section. (b) Property which meets all of the following qualifications shall acquire no situs so as to become subject to ad valorem taxation by political subdivisions of this state: (1) Such property is owned by a person who is not a Georgia resident and does not maintain or operate a place of business in Georgia; (2) Such person has contracted with a commercial printer located in Georgia for printing services to be performed in Georgia; and (3) Such property is provided by such person to such printer for the performance of such services.

History

Ga. L. 1969, p. 980, §§ 1, 2; Code 1933, § 91A-1006, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 309, § 2; Ga. L. 1983, p. 716, § 2; Ga. L. 1998, p. 124, § 1.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. Ga. L. 1998, p. 124, § 4, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that the amendment to this Code section is applicable to all taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1999.

Law reviews. For article discussing tax exemptions and deductions as incentives for establishment of foreign business in Georgia, see 27 Mercer L. Rev. 629 (1976). For article, “Freeport Exemption from Property Taxes for Inventory Stored in Georgia But Destined for Shipment Out-of-State,” see 28 Ga. St. B. J. 108 (1991).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS What constitutes goods “in transit.” - Imported stone tile/slab, which was stored at the taxpayer’s pleasure for sale to anyone who might wish to purchase it, was not “in transit to a final destination” within the contemplation of O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(2)(B) (see now O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(4)(B) ) and was consequently not exempt from ad valorem taxation under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-5. Seabrook Corp. v. Chatham County Bd. of Equalization, 195 Ga. App. 730, 394 S.E.2d 796, 1990 Ga. App. LEXIS 646 (1990). Merchandise brought into the United States through the port of Charleston, South Carolina and transported, via land freight carrier to a container freight station in Chatham County, was not “foreign merchandise in transit” and was therefore

not exempt from ad valorem taxation. Pier 1 Imports v. Chatham County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 199 Ga. App. 294, 404 S.E.2d 637, 1991 Ga. App. LEXIS 446 (1991), cert. denied, No. S91C0996, 1991 Ga. LEXIS 734 (Ga. May 22, 1991). Merchandise brought into the United States through the port of Savannah, Georgia, and transported monthly from Gotham County warehouse to the company’s distributorship office in Los Angeles was not “in transit” and was therefore not exempt from ad valorem taxation. Los Angeles Tile Co. v. Chatham County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 209 Ga. App. 245, 433 S.E.2d 82, 1993 Ga. App. LEXIS 837 (1993), cert. denied, No. S93C1524, 1993 Ga. LEXIS 906 (Ga. Oct. 5, 1993).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 71 Am. Jur. 2d, State and Local Taxation, § 157 et seq. ALR. Situs as between different states or countries of tangible chattels for purposes of property taxation, 110 A.L.R. 707. License or excise tax on merchandise brokers or persons performing similar functions as affected by commerce clause, 155 A.L.R. 239. State tax on or in respect of goods

shipped in interstate commerce to consignee for sale on consignor’s account without previous sale or order for purchase, 4 A.L.R.2d 244. Situs of vessels for tax purposes, 26 A.L.R.2d 1376. Situs of tangible personal property for purposes of property taxation, 2 A.L.R.4th 432. Situs of aircraft, rolling stock, and vessels for purposes of property taxation, 3 A.L.R.4th 837.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1990–1993 · leading case: Pier 1 Imports v. Chatham Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 404 S.E.2d 637 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991).
Pier 1 Imports v. Chatham Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 404 S.E.2d 637 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “Pier 1 appealed to the superior court, contending that the merchandise is exempt from ad valorem taxation because it is “[f]oreign merchandise in transit” pursuant to OCGA § 48-5-5, i.e., “Foreign merchandise in transit shall acquire no situs so as to become subject to ad…”
Seabrook Corp. v. Chatham Cnty. Bd. of Equalization, 394 S.E.2d 796 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 6× “The appellant appealed to superior court, contending that the property was “foreign merchandise in transit” and that the assessment was therefore prohibited by OCGA § 48-5-5. The superior court awarded summary judgment to the Board of Equalization, and this appeal followed.”
Los Angeles Tile Co. v. Chatham Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 433 S.E.2d 82 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 6× “Los Angeles Tile Company (LATCO), an importer of ceramic tile, appealed to the superior court pursuant to OCGA § 48-5-311 (f) seeking to establish that tile stored in its Garden City warehouse was foreign merchandise in transit exempt under OCGA § 48-5-5 from ad valorem taxation…”
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.