Garcia v. Am. Eagle Outfitters, Inc., 2025 Pa. LEXIS 233 (Pa. Superior Ct., February 19, 2025) (Brobson, J.)
The Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL) prohibits “[u]nfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.” Section 3(a) of the UTPCPL, 73 P.S. § 201-3(a). In this discretionary appeal, we must decide whether a merchant’s collection of sales tax occurs in the conduct of any trade or commerce as contemplated by the UTPCPL. For the reasons that follow, we hold that it does not. Because the Superior Court reached this same conclusion, we affirm the Superior Court’s order.
While we recognize that Section 3(a) of the UTPCPL might prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices within a broader category of circumstances than the advertising, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of property or services alone, we conclude that it cannot be so broad as to encompass actions taken by a merchant in its collection of sales tax. Because we rely upon the unique structure of the laws concerning the collection of sales tax to reach this conclusion, we do not hereby address the actionability of a complaint regarding duties imposed by other regulations or statutes, nor do we address the actionability of a complaint alleging improper retention of sales tax or a disingenuous charge labeled as a sales tax. See, e.g., Van v. LLR, Inc., 500 F.Supp.3d 927, 932 (D. Alaska 2020) (describing allegations that merchant knowingly instituted and continued improper and unlawful collection of sales tax based upon location of retailer and not purchaser). Instead, we address only those complaints that relate to a merchant’s collection of sales tax on an item, whether proper or improper, in attempted compliance with its duty under the law.
We hold that a merchant’s collection of sales tax does not occur “in the conduct of any trade or commerce” as that phrase is used in Section 3(a) of the UTPCPL. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the Superior Court.
