Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 82.04.030 (2026)
"Person," "company."
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
"Person" or "company", herein used interchangeably, means any individual, receiver, administrator, executor, assignee, trustee in bankruptcy, trust, estate, firm, copartnership, joint venture, club, company, joint stock company, business trust, municipal corporation, political subdivision of the state of Washington, corporation, limited liability company, association, society, or any group of individuals acting as a unit, whether mutual, cooperative, fraternal, nonprofit, or otherwise and the United States or any instrumentality thereof.
[ 1995 c 318 s 1; 1963 ex.s. c 28 s 1; 1961 c 15 s 82.04.030. Prior: 1955 c 389 s 4; prior: 1949 c 228 s 2, part; 1945 c 249 s 1, part; 1943 c 156 s 2, part; 1941 c 178 s 2, part; 1939 c 225 s 2, part; 1937 c 227 s 2, part; 1935 c 180 s 5, part; Rem. Supp. 1949 s 8370-5, part.]
Notes:
Effective date—1995 c 318: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and shall take effect immediately [May 11, 1995]." [ 1995 c 318 s 12.]
Effective date—1963 ex.s. c 28: "This act shall take effect on July 1, 1963." [ 1963 ex.s. c 28 s 17.]
International companies investing in Washington—Eligibility for excise tax incentives: RCW 43.330.068.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1960–2024 · leading case: Puget Sound Nat'l Bank v. Dep't of Revenue, 868 P.2d 127 (Wash. 1994).
Puget Sound Nat'l Bank v. Dep't of Revenue, 868 P.2d 127 (Wash. 1994). “) RCW 82.04.030. Unraveled, RCW 82.08.037 has three requirements: (1) the seller must be a person, (2) making sales at retail, and (3) entitled to a refund for sales taxes previously paid on debts which are deductible as worthless for federal income tax purposes.”
United States Tobacco Sales & Mktg. Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 982 P.2d 652 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “The statute makes no distinction between affiliated and nonaffiliated entities.”
John H. Sellen Constr. Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 558 P.2d 1342 (Wash. 1976). “25 King County Medical Blue Shield ................... 38,877.56 [3] "`Business' includes all activities engaged in with the object of gain, benefit, or advantage to the taxpayer or to another person or class, directly or indirectly.”
Simpson Inv. Co. v. State, Dept. of Revenue, 3 P.3d 741 (Wash. 2000). “During this same period Simpson continued to contest the Department's assessment, seeking redress through administrative appeals and court action.”
KMS Fin. Servs., Inc. v. City of Seattle, 146 P.3d 1195 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “at 583 (quoting RCW 82.04.030). The Davenport court concluded *500 that a real estate brokerage office is best described as a group of individuals acting as a unit and that the tax can therefore be levied only once against each commission.”
Nordstrom Credit, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 845 P.2d 1331 (Wash. 1993). “RCW 82.04.030. The unitary business doctrine prevents the dissection of a corporation into its component parts for proposes of assessing a B&O tax.”
King Cnty. v. City of Algona, 681 P.2d 1281 (Wash. 1984). “030, which defined "person": "Person" or "company," herein used interchangeably, means any individual, receiver, assignee, trustee in bankruptcy, trust, estate, firm, copartnership, joint venture, club, company, joint stock company, business trust, municipal corporation,…”
Activate, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 150 Wash. App. 807 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Under RCW 82.04.030, the term “person” includes corporations and limited liability companies.”
City of Seattle v. State, 367 P.2d 123 (Wash. 1961). “” As a municipal corporation is a taxable “person” under RCW 82.04.030, the above activities of the park department constitute “business” if carried on for the purpose expressed in the above-quoted section which defines that term.”
Home Depot USA v. State, Dept. of Revenue, 215 P.3d 222 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Unit ¶ 40 In its reply brief, Home Depot presents a new argument that it and the *230 financing companies qualify as a single "unit," allowing Home Depot to seek the sales tax refund.”
Davenport, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 494 P.2d 1376 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972). “) The taxpayer or person who may be taxed is defined in RCW 82.04.030: “Person” or “company,” herein used interchangeably, means any individual, receiver, administrator, executor, assignee, trustee in bankruptcy, trust, estate, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, club, company,…”
Home Depot USA, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 151 Wash. App. 909 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Unit ¶40 In its reply brief, Home Depot presents a new argument that it and the financing companies qualify as a single “unit,” allowing Home Depot to seek the sales tax refund. Appellant’s Reply Br.”
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.