Des Moines, IA – An ordinarily obscure section of Iowa’s tax code has become the center of an unusual legal and political dispute after prosecutors charged Rep. Jonah Kessler, D-Maple Falls, with violating Iowa Code Section 423.3(3)(a). The statute requires restaurants to apply different sales tax rates depending on whether food is consumed on the premises or taken off the premises. Prosecutors say Kessler repeatedly selected the lower tax “eat out” option at self-checkout kiosks while eating his meals in areas they argue qualify as part of restaurant property. The total difference in tax across nine meals amounts to $1.08.
Kessler has been charged under a Class D felony interpretation of intentional tax misrepresentation. If convicted, he could face up to 5 years in prison and a fine ranging from 1,025 to 10,245 dollars under Iowa law, although legal experts note that first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum penalty in low-dollar tax disputes.
The most prominent allegation involves a turkey club sandwich Kessler purchased at Slate and Stone. According to investigators, Kessler selected the take-out option but then sat on a bench about fourteen feet from the restaurant’s door. Prosecutors argue the bench, maintained by the business as part of its frontage area, constitutes on-premises consumption. State Prosecutor Lydia Grummond said the amount of money is small but accuracy in classification matters, adding that “the distinction between on-premises and off-premises dining exists for a reason, and the state has an obligation to enforce it consistently” and that “accuracy in tax classification matters for every Iowan, including elected officials.”
Kessler rejects the allegations and says he believed he was following the rules. “I did not try to deceive anyone. I sat outside on a public-style bench, and I believed that counted as eating out. Most people would see it the same way,” he said. He also argued that the charge reflects more than a simple tax disagreement. “Let me ask you something. If I weren’t a Black man representing Democratic constituents in a mostly conservative state, do you honestly think I’d still be facing a criminal charge over where I ate a sandwich?” Kessler said. “I don’t believe most Iowans, regardless of politics, think this is a fair use of state resources.”
Sen. Angela Merriweather said the situation illustrates how outdated portions of Iowa’s food tax code have become. She explained that many of these distinctions were created decades ago, long before widespread outdoor seating, shared public-private benches, or modern parklet designs. “We need clearer language because a typical customer would not assume that a bench near a restaurant automatically counts as dining in under state law,” she said.
Tax policy experts say the original purpose of the distinction was to separate restaurant meals, treated as taxable services, from grocery-type food intended for home consumption. Dr. Martin Greeley of Drake University said the rules remain enforceable but are not always intuitive in modern mixed-use spaces. He noted that “in most states the responsibility for correct classification falls on businesses, not customers, which makes this case somewhat unusual.”
Civil liberties organizations have questioned whether a criminal charge is the proper means of addressing what appears to be a classification disagreement, though they acknowledge the state has authority under Section 423.3(3)(a) if it believes the misclassification was intentional. Public reaction has been divided, with some residents viewing the case as disproportionate to the small amount of revenue involved, while others argue that elected officials should be expected to comply precisely with the law in all circumstances.
Kessler’s arraignment is scheduled for next Wednesday. Regardless of the outcome, the case has already prompted early legislative discussions about modernizing Iowa’s tax language to clarify how outdoor dining areas and adjacent public spaces should be treated.
Truth Bureau 