You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

City of Boston v. Mac-Gray Co.

Citations: 359 N.E.2d 946; 371 Mass. 825; 1977 Mass. LEXIS 847

Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court; February 4, 1977; Massachusetts; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, Mac-Gray Company, Inc. challenged the City of Boston's imposition of personal property tax on its self-service coin-operated washing and drying machines located in apartment building basements. The taxpayer argued that these machines were exempt from taxation under G.L.c. 59, § 5, Clause Sixteenth (2), which exempts certain property of domestic business corporations when considered 'stock in trade.' The Superior Court ruled against the taxpayer, and the case was brought before the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. The court evaluated whether the machines qualified as exempt 'stock in trade.' It concluded that the machines, operated under a license agreement with apartment owners and not sold or leased, did not meet the definition of 'stock in trade,' as they function as part of self-service laundromats. The court reasoned that the taxpayer's business model was based on providing a service, allowing customers the opportunity to use the equipment. As such, the machines were deemed taxable. The decision adhered to established legal precedents, with the court noting the absence of legislative amendments to alter the statutory definitions at issue. Consequently, the judgment affirmed the Superior Court's ruling in favor of the City of Boston, confirming the taxability of the machines for the contested years.

Legal Issues Addressed

Definition of 'Stock in Trade'

Application: The court clarified that 'stock in trade' does not include machinery used in providing services, such as the operation of laundromats, where the taxpayer does not sell or lease machines but allows their use under a license agreement.

Reasoning: While the machines are indeed used in the taxpayer's business, the court found they do not constitute 'stock in trade' since the taxpayer does not sell or lease them, but operates them under a license agreement with apartment owners.

Precedent and Legislative Action in Tax Matters

Application: The court emphasized that tax decisions should align with established precedents unless legislative changes dictate otherwise.

Reasoning: In tax matters, decisions should align with established precedents, allowing the Legislature to adjust tax statutes as needed.

Taxation of Personal Property

Application: The court determined that self-service coin-operated washing and drying machines located in apartment building basements do not qualify as 'stock in trade' and are therefore subject to local personal property tax.

Reasoning: The taxpayer argued these machines were exempt from local taxation under G.L.c. 59, § 5, Clause Sixteenth (2), which exempts certain property of domestic business corporations.