Miami-Dade FL and Immigration Lawyers | Nancy Francillon -- eLawyers

94-001452 CAMDEN CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 17, 1994

The issue for determination is whether Petitioner is liable for use tax, pursuant to Chapter 212, Florida Statutes, to the Florida Department of Revenue for the use and storage of a vessel.Petitioner failed to show that respondent's assessment was improper and that it was entitled to an exemption from use tax/affirm assessment.

95-001800 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE vs PINELLAS REBOS CLUB, INC. (1995)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 13, 1995

The issue for consideration in this hearing is whether the Pinellas Rebos Club's tax exempt certificate should be granted or denied because of the matters set forth in the Department of Revenue's Administrative Complaint filed herein on March 15, 1995.Private club for alcoholics which was used by rehabilitation agencies as integral part of program qualifies for sales tax exempt though funds expended are not direct

94-001741 DAVID BEN GURION CULTURE CLUB vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 04, 1994

Whether Petitioner qualifies for a consumer's certificate of exemption from sales and use tax as a "charitable institution."Club's primary purpose was not to raise funds for charitable organizations.

95-002114 FAMILY EDUCATION AND HEALTH MINISTRY, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1995)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 02, 1995

Whether the Petitioner qualifies for a consumer's certificate of exemption as a "Religious Institution" or "Church" or as a "Charitable Institution" as defined in Chapter 212, Florida Statutes.Petitioner showed physical location where regular services were conducted. Department had no evidence to rebuttal. Rejected departmentt's argument requiring public access.

94-004076 CONSUMER CREDIT CONSULTANTS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 20, 1994

The issue for determination in this proceeding is whether Petitioner qualifies for a certificate of exemption as a charitable organization within the meaning of Section 212.08(7)(o)2.b., Florida Statutes. 1/Non-profit corporation classified as 501(c)(3) for federal tax purposes not entitled to state certification because services provided by corporation neither welfare, free nor disadvantaged service

95-001247 KENNETH BLUME AND LINDA BLUME vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1995)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 13, 1995

On June 24, 1992, Petitioners Kenneth and Tina Blume (Petitioners) recorded a quit claim deed at the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Santa Rosa County, Florida. Respondent Department of Revenue (Respondent) subsequently assessed Petitioners additional documentary stamp taxes pursuant to Sections 201.01 and 201.02, Florida Statutes (1991), and Rules 12B-4.004 through 12B-4.014, Florida Administrative Code. Petitioners protested the assessment and filed a Petition for administrative hearing on March 7, 1995. Respondent referred the case to the Division of Administrative Hearings for assignment of a Hearing Officer on March 13, 1995.Respondent properly assessed additional tax on quit claim deed transferring an interest in real property from husband to husband and wife.

94-001790RP AIRPORT LIMOUSINE SERVICE OF ORLANDO, INC., AND YELLOW CAB OF ORLANDO, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 06, 1994

The issue in this case is whether proposed amendments to Rule 12A-1.070 are an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. Petitioners and Intervenors challenge Proposed Rule 12A-1.070(1) and (4)(a) and (b). Respondent published the amendments in the Florida Administrative Law Weekly on March 18, 1994 and June 10, 1994. As described in the Joint Prehearing Stipulation, the proposed rule amendments address, among other things, the taxation of payments to airport authorities from concessionaires like rental car companies and airport restaurants. The law imposes a sales tax on payments for the use or occupancy of real property, whether the agreement consists of a lease or a license to use real property. The main dispute in these cases is whether the proposed rule amendments illegally extend the sales tax to payments for intangibles like a concession, franchise, or privilege to do business.Proposed rule invalidly extended sales tax to non-rent payments for concessions.

Nancy Francillon