Legal Opinion · Dissent

DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Levin

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 2008No. 2006-1731Published

1DissentLanzinger, J.

{¶ 30} I dissent from the holding that a vehicle owner who receives “goodwill repairs” is a “consumer” for use-tax purposes. I would affirm the Board of Tax Appeals (“BTA”) based on Gen. Motors Corp. v. Wilkins, 102 Ohio St.3d 33, 2004-Ohio-1869, 806 N.E.2d 517.

{¶ 31} A “consumer” for purposes of use tax is “any person who has purchased tangible personal property or has been provided a service for storage, use, or other consumption or benefit in this state. ‘Consumer’ does not include a person who receives, without charge, tangible personal property or a service.” (Emphasis added.) R.C.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. General Motors Corp. v. WilkinsOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  2. International Thomson Publishing, Inc. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API