By: dmc-admin//March 31, 2003//
By: dmc-admin//March 31, 2003//
“There is no dispute that the substantial foundations associated with a 480-foot tower mean moving the properties could not be done with ease. However, the commission determined that a market existed for the sale and purchase of used towers, and that the tower could be disassembled and reassembled at another site. Waukesha Tower had the right to remove the tower from the land, and the landowner had the right to terminate the lease at the end of the lease term. Despite the tower’s large size, nothing in the Harvestore test suggests that size alone can manifest intent to create a permanent accession to the land. In view of the undisputed facts, we conclude that a reasonable person would not have intended the tower to be a permanent accession to the land.
“Because we conclude that the tower is ‘tangible personal property,’ we affirm the commission’s decision imposing sales and use taxes against All City.”
Order affirmed.
Recommended for publication in the official reports.
Dist IV, Dane County, Albert, J., Lundsten, J.
Attorneys:
For Appellant: Margaret M. Derus, Milwaukee; John R. Austin, Milwaukee
For Respondent: F. Thomas Creeron III, Madison