In a private letter ruling, the Utah State Tax Commission found that an out-of-state “nexus seller” would not create nexus for an out-of-state “related seller”. In the letter, the nexus seller has an office in Utah as well as employees to support and service its Utah customers. The related seller does not have any retail stores or employees, engage in any Utah activities, or own or lease any real property in Utah. Under these facts, the Commission found that the related seller does not meet Utah’s statutory definition of a retailer engaged in business. On the other hand, since the related seller is an affiliate, further analysis had to be done to determine if the related seller had affiliate nexus instead. The nexus seller was a web-based provider of e-commerce services and did provide the related seller with certain business services for its backend infrastructure, including content delivery network and storage services. However, these services were not provided in Utah. It was therefore determined that the related seller does not have affiliate nexus in Utah based on the types of services performed as long as those services are not directly related to establishing or maintaining a market in Utah for new or existing customers. (Private Letter Ruling, Opinion No. 09-008, Utah State Tax Commission, July 28, 2009)