Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 372.630 (2026)

Certification of excess amount collected; credit and refund; overpayment of use tax by purchaser

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 372.630  Certification of excess amount collected; credit and refund; overpayment of use tax by purchaser.

      1.  If the Department determines that any amount, penalty or interest has been paid more than once or has been erroneously or illegally collected or computed, the Department shall set forth that fact in the records of the Department and certify to the State Board of Examiners the amount collected in excess of the amount legally due and the person from whom it was collected or by whom paid. If approved by the State Board of Examiners, the excess amount collected or paid must, after being credited against any amount then due from the person in accordance with NRS 360.236, be refunded to the person, or his or her successors, administrators or executors.

      2.  Any overpayment of the use tax by a purchaser to a retailer who is required to collect the tax and who gives the purchaser a receipt therefor pursuant to sections 34 to 38, inclusive, of the Sales and Use Tax Act (chapter 397, Statutes of Nevada 1955) and NRS 372.210 to 372.255, inclusive, must be credited or refunded by the State to the purchaser, subject to the requirements of NRS 360.236.

      (Added to NRS by 1979, 426; A 2009, 67)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1983–2017 · leading case: State, Dep't of Taxation v. Chrysler Grp. LLC, 300 P.3d 713 (Nev. 2013).
State, Dep't of Taxation v. Chrysler Grp. LLC, 300 P.3d 713 (Nev. 2013). · cites it 7× “630, Nevada’s lemon law; NRS 372.630, Nevada’s sales and use tax refund statute; and NRS 372.”
State, Dep't of Taxation v. Masco Builder Cabinet Grp., 265 P.3d 666 (Nev. 2011). “If the taxpayer making the claim has collected the tax from his customers, he has suffered no loss or injury, and is not entitled to a credit or refund even if the tax was paid erroneously”).”
State v. Obexer & Son, Inc., 660 P.2d 981 (Nev. 1983). · cites it 3× “1 NRS 372.630 provides as follows: 1. If the department determines that any amount, penalty or interest has been paid more than once or has been erroneously or illegally collected or computed, the department shall set forth that fact in the records of the department and certify…”
Campbell v. State, Dep't of Taxation, 827 P.2d 833 (Nev. 1992). “Subsequently, in a letter dated August 9, 1990, the Campbells demanded a refund of the penalty and interest portion of the tax, “pursuant to NRS 372.630 et seq. and all other pertinent tax refund statutes .”
So. Calif. Edison Vs. State, Dep't of Taxation, 2017 NV 49 (Nev. 2017). · cites it 2× “NRS 372.630(1) states that if a tax has been "erroneously or illegally collected" it must "be refunded to the person.”
So. Calif. Edison Vs. State, Dep't of Taxation, 2017 NV 49 (Nev. 2017). “NRS 372.630(1) states that if a tax has been "erroneously or illegally collected" it must "be refunded to the person.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 372.630(1) — 4 cases
State v. Obexer & Son, Inc., 660 P.2d 981 (Nev. 1983). “1 NRS 372.630 provides as follows: 1. If the department determines that any amount, penalty or interest has been paid more than once or has been erroneously or illegally collected or computed, the department shall set forth that fact in the records of the department and certify…”
State, Dep't of Taxation v. Chrysler Grp. LLC, 300 P.3d 713 (Nev. 2013). “630, Nevada’s lemon law; NRS 372.630, Nevada’s sales and use tax refund statute; and NRS 372.”
So. Calif. Edison Vs. State, Dep't of Taxation, 2017 NV 49 (Nev. 2017). “NRS 372.630(1) states that if a tax has been "erroneously or illegally collected" it must "be refunded to the person.”
So. Calif. Edison Vs. State, Dep't of Taxation, 2017 NV 49 (Nev. 2017). “NRS 372.630(1) states that if a tax has been "erroneously or illegally collected" it must "be refunded to the person.”
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.