Broward FL Lawyers | Jonathan W Taylor -- eLawyers

18-004992RU GBR ENTERPRISES, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (2018)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 17, 2018

As to DOAH Case No. 18-4475RX, whether Florida Administrative Code Rule 12A-1.044(5)(a) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority in violation of section 120.52(8), Florida Statutes.1/ As to DOAH Case No. 18-4992RU, whether the Department of Revenue's ("Department") Standard Audit Plan, Vending and Amusement Machines--Industry Specific, section 1.1.3.3 ("SAP") is an unadopted rule in violation of sections 120.54 and 120.56, Florida Statutes.DOR exceeded its grant of rulemaking authority as to existing rule and the rule enlarges, modifies, or contravenes law implemented. However, agency statement is not a rule.

16-003105RU GLOBAL HOOKAH DISTRIBUTORS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO (2016)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 06, 2016

The issue in this case is whether Respondent, Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco (the “Department”), is operating under an unadopted rule in its application of sections 210.276 and 210.30, Florida Statutes, which impose a surcharge and an excise tax, respectively, on tobacco products other than cigarettes or cigars, commonly known as other tobacco products (“OTP”), by utilization of “best available information” in lieu of actual documents submitted by the taxpayer when performing audits to establish a tax assessment. Unless otherwise stated herein, all references to Florida Statutes shall be to the 2016 codification.There is no proof that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, relied upon an unadopted rule.

19-001057F GRABBA-LEAF, LLC vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO (2019)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 27, 2019

The amount of attorneys’ fees and costs to be assessed against Respondent, to be paid to Petitioner pursuant to section 120.595(4), Florida Statutes, and the First District Court of Appeal’s Order of Remand.Attorney's fees/costs assessed for administrative hearing and appeal per parties' stipulation for successful unadopted rule challenge.

17-001562 INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF DESIGN, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (2017)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 15, 2017

The issue in this case is whether Petitioners qualify for an exemption from paying sales tax on the lease of real property under sections 212.0602 and 212.08(7), Florida Statutes (2013),1/ from July 1, 2010, through April 30, 2013.Petitioners proved that they qualified for an exemption from sales tax under section 212.0602.

17-001563 INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF MERCHANDISING AND DESIGN, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (2017)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 15, 2017

The issue in this case is whether Petitioners qualify for an exemption from paying sales tax on the lease of real property under sections 212.0602 and 212.08(7), Florida Statutes (2013),1/ from July 1, 2010, through April 30, 2013.Petitioners proved that they qualified for an exemption from sales tax under section 212.0602.

16-006333 130 NE 40TH STREET, LLC, D/B/A MICHAEL'S GENUINE FOOD AND DRINK vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (2016)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 28, 2016

The issues to be determined in this proceeding are 1) whether Respondent, the Department of Revenue (Respondent or the Department), demonstrated that it made an assessment against the taxpayer, as well as the factual and legal basis for the assessment; 2) whether Petitioner, 130 NE 40th Street, LLC, d/b/a Michael’s Genuine Food and Drink (Petitioner or Michael’s), is entitled to enterprise zone job credits (EZ credits) claimed on its sales and use tax returns for the audited period; and whether the penalty and interest assessed in the August 18, 2016, Notice of Decision is justified.DOR could not revisit its approval of enterprise zone credits to disallow them, but could verify credits against actual wages paid. Recommend assessment be reduced accordingly.

19-004819 JOEY BAUTISTA vs STATE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION (2019)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 12, 2019

The issue in this proceeding is whether Petitioner was convicted of specified criminal offenses, requiring the forfeiture of all his rights and benefits under the Florida Retirement System, except for the return of accumulated contributions.Petitioner was convicted of specified criminal offenses, requiring the forfeiture of all his rights and benefits under the Florida Retirement System, except for the return of accumulated contributions.

20-003711 MATA CHORWADI, INC., D/B/A HOMING INN vs PALM BEACH COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR (2020)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 17, 2020

Whether Respondent properly assessed a tourist development tax, penalty, and interest against Petitioner.Respondent proved Petitioner owed tourist development tax, penalty, and interest.

Jonathan W Taylor