Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301 (2026)

Privilege taxes - Tax on retail sales - Carrier license fees - Mixing bar tax

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

Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 1024,s 12, eff. 5/28/2024.

Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 926,s 3, eff. 5/6/2024.

Amended by 2024 Tenn. Acts, ch. 865,s 4, eff. 7/1/2024.

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 330, s 3, eff. 5/4/2021.

Amended by 2017 Tenn. Acts, ch. 338, s 4, eff. 5/9/2017.

Amended by 2014 Tenn. Acts, ch. 915, s 1, eff. 5/13/2014.

Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 371, s 2, eff. 5/6/2013.

Acts 1967, ch. 211, § 3; 1972, ch. 682, § 5; 1972, ch. 756, § 6; 1979, ch. 284, § 1; 1979, ch. 401, § 5; T.C.A., § 57-157; Acts 1980, ch. 898, § 3; 1981, ch. 404, § 5; 1981, ch. 475, § 5; 1983, ch. 52, § 6; 1983, ch. 300, § 5; 1983, ch. 469, § 8; 1984, ch. 975, § 8; 1986, ch. 899, § 9; 1987, ch. 444, §§ 10, 11; 1991, ch. 219, § 2; 1992, ch. 674, § 8; 1998, ch. 795, § 4; 2001, ch. 64, § 3; 2001, ch. 74, § 5; 2001, ch. 84, § 3; 2004, ch. 544, § 3; 2004, ch. 876, §§ 7 - 10; 2005, ch. 253, § 3; 2009 , ch. 168, § 1; 2010 , ch. 647, § 3; 2010 , ch. 1133, § 4; 2012 , ch. 790, §§ 3, 4.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1980–2019 · leading case: Oliver v. King, 612 S.W.2d 152 (Tenn. 1981).
Oliver v. King, 612 S.W.2d 152 (Tenn. 1981). · cites it 12× “NOTES [1] Recodified as T.C.A. § 57-4-301. [2] Recodified as T.C.”
Stratton v. Jackson, 707 S.W.2d 865 (Tenn. 1986). · cites it 14× “This taxation case involves the application of T.C.A. § 57-4-301, known as the mixing bar tax.”
Copper Cellar Corp. v. Jackson, 762 S.W.2d 560 (Tenn. 1988). · cites it 10× “The Chancellor rendered a memorandum opinion in which he cited T.C.A. § 57-4-301(a) to the effect: “... Every person is exercising a taxable privilege who engages in the business of selling at retail in this State alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.”
Edmondson Mgmt. Serv., Inc. v. Woods, 603 S.W.2d 716 (Tenn. 1980). · cites it 2× “T.C.A., § 57-4-301(c) provides: “In addition to the privilege taxes levied in (b)(1) above, there is further levied a tax equal to the rate of fifteen percent (15%) of the sales price of all alcoholic beverages sold for consumption on the premises, said tax to be computed on the…”
Com. Union Bank v. Possum Holler, Inc., 620 S.W.2d 487 (Tenn. 1981). · cites it 2× “See T.C.A. § 57-4-301, formerly 57 — 157. The parties agreed that the Commissioner would sell the collateral and the parties would then litigate over the proceeds.”
Exch. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Olsen, 655 S.W.2d 938 (Tenn. 1983). · cites it 4× “The Plaintiff contends that its surety bond indemnifies the licensee only against taxes assessed on the privilege of selling liquor by the drink, which taxes are imposed by T.C.A. § 57-4-301; that the bond was not intended to cover general sales taxes; and that the statute does…”
Benevolent Prot. Order of Elks, Lodge No. 1279 v. Olsen, 669 S.W.2d 654 (Tenn. 1984). · cites it 2× “It is accordingly subject to the privilege taxes provided in T.C.A. § 57-4-301(c) and to numerous other statutes regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages.”
Ace of Clubs v. Huddleston, 872 S.W.2d 679 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “The state collects a tax of 15% of the sales price of all alcoholic beverages sold for consumption on the premises, Tenn.Code Ann. § 57-4-301(c), and collects the state sales tax on the admission fees.”
Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. City of Tullahoma, 574 S.W.3d 832 (2019). · cites it 2× “3 Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301 (c) (2013). We refer to this as "the LBD tax.”
Bradley Cnty. Sch. Sys. v. The City of Cleveland, Tennessee, 575 S.W.3d 515 (2019). · cites it 2× “3 Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301 (c) (2013). We refer to this as "the LBD tax.”
Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. City of Tullahoma (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301 (c). The tax is collected by the retailer from the consumer and forwarded to the commissioner of revenue.”
Washington Cnty. Sch. Sys. v. The City of Johnson City, Tennessee, 575 S.W.3d 316 (2019). · cites it 2× “3 Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301 (c) (2013). We refer to this as "the LBD tax.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301(a) — 2 cases
Oliver v. King, 612 S.W.2d 152 (Tenn. 1981). “NOTES [1] Recodified as T.C.A. § 57-4-301. [2] Recodified as T.C.”
Copper Cellar Corp. v. Jackson, 762 S.W.2d 560 (Tenn. 1988). “The Chancellor rendered a memorandum opinion in which he cited T.C.A. § 57-4-301(a) to the effect: “... Every person is exercising a taxable privilege who engages in the business of selling at retail in this State alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301(b)(l) — 1 case
Stratton v. Jackson, 707 S.W.2d 865 (Tenn. 1986). “This taxation case involves the application of T.C.A. § 57-4-301, known as the mixing bar tax.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 57-4-301(c) — 6 cases
Stratton v. Jackson, 707 S.W.2d 865 (Tenn. 1986). “This taxation case involves the application of T.C.A. § 57-4-301, known as the mixing bar tax.”
Oliver v. King, 612 S.W.2d 152 (Tenn. 1981). “NOTES [1] Recodified as T.C.A. § 57-4-301. [2] Recodified as T.C.”
Copper Cellar Corp. v. Jackson, 762 S.W.2d 560 (Tenn. 1988). “The Chancellor rendered a memorandum opinion in which he cited T.C.A. § 57-4-301(a) to the effect: “... Every person is exercising a taxable privilege who engages in the business of selling at retail in this State alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.”
Edmondson Mgmt. Serv., Inc. v. Woods, 603 S.W.2d 716 (Tenn. 1980). “T.C.A., § 57-4-301(c) provides: “In addition to the privilege taxes levied in (b)(1) above, there is further levied a tax equal to the rate of fifteen percent (15%) of the sales price of all alcoholic beverages sold for consumption on the premises, said tax to be computed on the…”
Benevolent Prot. Order of Elks, Lodge No. 1279 v. Olsen, 669 S.W.2d 654 (Tenn. 1984). “It is accordingly subject to the privilege taxes provided in T.C.A. § 57-4-301(c) and to numerous other statutes regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages.”
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.