The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-05-26
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
Ra1aiph Anil % 1901

Raleigh, April p, 1891.
". II. Worth, ESD, State Business Agent of N.
G. Farmers State alliance:
DEAR SIR:-l have your letter in which, after
setting forth the nature and plans of the Bust
ness Agency of the Farmers Alliance, and re-
ferring me to the accompanying printed dOcu-
ments relating to the same, you ask whether the
Agency is liable to the tax on purchases.
You state that the members of the Alliance in
the state employ one man as their Business
IS the best market to purchase their goods for
their individual consumption, not in any case
sOr speculation; the individual members place
their orders for goods that they wish for their
individual consumption, with the Sub-Business
Agent, and he forwards the order to the County
Business Agent, and he sends it to the State
Agent, and L buy for them in any market where
| can do so most advantageOusly. They simply
employ me to write their letters and look out
where are the best markets to buy their goods,
and have me 60 their correspondence for them.
l keep no stock on hand and 6nly buy for County
and Sub-Agents and individual members of the
Alliance. The same will apply to the sewing
machines that I have furnished to the brethren
of the State. The machines are sold at the fac
tory to the party who uses it,
note also that the article of the Constitution
regulation and control by the Executive Com
mittee of the Alliance and that it is prohibited
from making any charge for its services to men,
bers contributing not less than a specified sum
to the Fund.-, and to those contributing less, only
such charges as the Executive may
deem just, to be applied to the expenses of the
Agency.
Upon these statements and representations of
the nature, purposes and methods of the Agency,
l am of the opinion that 1t IS not subject to q tax
on its purchases, inasmuch as they are not made
for the purpose of trade, speculation or profit of
the Agency or of the Alliance as a Corporation,
but for the use, consumption and benefit of the
members who are the purchasers through their
own appointed factOtum or purveyOr, the Bust
ness Agent.
The conclusion is based upon the idea solely
that the Business Agency is conducted eXclU-
sively for the benefit of its employers or princi-
pals-the members of the Alliance who are
really the purchasers, because they are the
users and consumers of the articles bought and
that no profit is otherwise aimed at or realized
in it's transactions. Should the Business Agent
enlarge the operations and buy and sell to others
than those who employ him, or should conduct
the Agency so as to make it a source of profit
beyond the meeting of the expenses to himself
or the Alliance as d corporation, then he or his
Agency would be considered as in the realm of
trade, and liable, as other tradesmen, to the
purchase tax.
think the decision of the Supreme Court of
North Carolina, in the case of STOKES Us. the
Department of Agriculture, 1O6 n. G. RepsrtS,
page 439, SustainS the position | hVea taken.
state further that the term merchant" or
dealer in the Act to Raise Revenue as it
appears to me, refers to the persons who buy
and sell to the public generally for a profit, and
does not embrace any maj or set of men who
only act as agents in ordering goods for others,
the agent not making a profit on a sale.
Very respectfully,
NAL w. BAN, State Treas.