A new taxation issue has arisen for tanning salon owners. In Tan Pro, Inc. v. Levin, following the BTA’s ruling that tanning beds, ultra-violet radiation, tanning lamps, privacy partitions, sanitation chemicals, and disposable wipes did not qualify for the resale exemption, Tan Pro, Inc. appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, Case No. 2014-0725. The Court, however, stayed the case and referred the case to mediation. This decision arose after the taxpayer claimed the resale exemption for tanning equipment, arguing the property was resold to the taxpayer’s customers (i.e., possession threof was conveyed). The BTA, however, found that the property was not resold to the taxpayer’s customers in the same form as purchased, nor was it permanently transferred to the customers so as to qualify for the resale exemption. In so holding, the BTA found that it was the taxpayer/salon who was the consumer of these items rendered in providing its personal care service.