The Claw Beats The Taxman

Written by Mark Rasch
April 11th, 2013

Attorney Mark D. Rasch is the former head of the U.S. Justice Department’s computer crime unit and today is a lawyer in Bethesda Maryland specializing in privacy and security law.

Remember as a kid going to the arcade and playing “The Claw?” You know, the machine that contained a pile of plush toys, where you would put in an endless stream of quarters, and hopefully be able to snag one of those toys? After about $10 worth of tries, you would eventually win a stuffed flounder worth about a quarter, right? Well the Texas Supreme Court has weighed in on the sales tax consequences of that transaction, which comes down ultimately to the questions of what did the consumer pay for, and what did they receive? And this might provide some limited guidance for other retailers.

When you sell something, the price is supposed to be a bargained-for negotiation between a willing purchaser and a willing seller. You are buying a product or a service. Tub of popcorn, $2. Tub of popcorn at a movie theater, $6 (but for another 25 cents you can get a jumbo!) The consumer is buying a product, the product has a specified “value,” and that transaction is called a sale. And the government gets a slice of that “sale” – maybe 6 percent of the sales price. Sales taxes typically apply to retail sales (merchant to consumer) of non-exempt tangible personal products, and to certain specified services as well.Disney Princess 1-Medium

So here’s the problem when you try to apply this law to the claw. Despite what the carnies tell you, not everyone’s a winner. It’s a game of chance and skill. What is the machine operator “selling?” A plush toy, or the experience of trying to win one? As the court points out, if there were no toys in the box, nobody would play, and if everyone won each time, the game would be no fun. And if there was a “sale,” what would be the price? The retail value of the item if sold otherwise? The cost of the item to the vendor? The amount paid by the consumer? A skilled consumer (or a lucky one) could get that stuffed Elmo for a quarter, a less skilled one could pay $20 with the same result, and a less patient one could get no toy at all. These are the kinds of issues that occupy the highest minds in Austin.

Ultimately, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the transactions were not taxable, based upon the juxtaposition of several provisions of the tax code (what is a sale, what is a taxable service, what is tangible personal property, what is a service that is an Integral part of a taxable service, what is a sale for resale, what is the coin operated machine exemption, and the application of the (Texas Tax) Commissioner’s Rule for the operators of games or concessions). The government argued that “when each participant does not receive a prize, the game operator–or concessionaire–is not a retailer, but a consumer of the items it purchases to provide its services.”


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.