Opinion: Where is natural gas "used"?
G-P Gypsum Corp. v. Dep't of Revenue, No. 81995-5. The City of Tacoma imposes a tax on the use of natural gas. Gypsum operates a manufacturing plant in the City. Gypsum purchases natural gas outside the City and transports it to the plant. Gypsum claims that according to the statute, "use" occurs where the gas is delivered, which is outside Tacoma's taxing jurisdiction.
The Court of Appeals agreed with Gypsum.
Today, the Supreme Court overturns the lower court and holds that Gypsum does "use" the natural gas within Tacoma. The majority opinion finds that "the local BNG [brokered natural gas] tax holds a special position within the universe of Washington's use tax provisions." Rather than the usual statutory definition of "use," the Court applies the more ordinary definition to find that Tacoma can tax Gypsum's consumption of natural gas.
Justice Stephens wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Chief Justice Madsen and Justices Owens, Chambers, and Fairhurst. Justice Sanders dissents, joined by Justices Alexander, Charles Johnson, and James Johnson, arguing that the statutory definition is "plain on its face." (briefs, argument)
Thank you for this helpful information.