ANNE GANNON, IN HER CAPACITY AS PALM BEACH COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR, ON BEHALF OF PALM BEACH COUNTY
v.
AIRBNB, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This case involves an appeal concerning whether certain corporations are obligated to collect and remit Tourist Development Tax under Florida law. The appellate panel denied appellant's motion for certification to the Florida Supreme Court, with one judge dissenting on the grounds that the statutory interpretation question has great public importance.
The appellate panel denied the motion for certification to the Florida Supreme Court. The majority determined that certification was not warranted, though the specific rationale is not stated in this excerpt.
[1] A motion for certification to the Florida Supreme Court regarding statutory interpretation of tax collection obligations imposed on third-party payment processors may be…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Whether the appellee corporations have the obligation to collect a Tourist Development Tax and remit it to the taxing authority is a question of great public importance and of statutory interpretation that the Florida Supreme Court should resolve for all the citizens and local governments of the state.”
Justice Gross's dissent arguing for certification
The case concerns whether appellee corporations have an obligation to collect a Tourist Development Tax and remit it to the taxing authority. The disp…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Possessory Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; James Nutt, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502014CA000428XXXXMBAO.
Philip M. Burlington and Adam Richardson of Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A., West Palm Beach, and Louis M. Silber of Silber & Davis, West Palm Beach, and Jeffrey M. Liggio and Olivia D. Liggio of Liggio Law, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Nicole K. Atkinson, Kenneth Bell, and Amy S.L. Terwilleger of Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A., West Palm Beach, and Craig S. Primis and Devin Anderson of Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, Washington, D.C., and Jeffrey A. Rossman of Freeborn & Peters LLP, Chicago, Illinois, for appellees.
ON MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION
Appellant’s motion for certification is denied. LEVINE, C.J., and DAMOORGIAN, J., concur. GROSS, J., dissents with opinion. GROSS, J., dissenting.
I dissent from the panel’s denial of the motion for certification of a question of great public importance.
Tourism is the lifeblood of Florida. Covid-19 has shuttered the tourism industry, but that will not always be so. When Florida emerges from the economic impact of the pandemic, local governments will be starved for revenue. Whether the appellee corporations have the obligation to collect a Tourist Development Tax and remit it to the taxing authority is a question of great public importance and of statutory interpretation that the Florida Supreme Court should resolve for all the citizens and local governments of the state. Therefore, I would certify the following question:
Does section 125.0104(f)-(g), Florida Statutes, require that the person “receiving the consideration” also have the ability to grant a possessory interest in the property?