Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...y Property Appraiser; Morgan Gilreath, as Volusia County Property Appraiser; and H.W. *927 "Bill" Suber, as Seminole County Property Appraiser, as Amici Curiae. PER CURIAM. We have on appeal a decision of the Third District Court of Appeal declaring section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1997), unconstitutional. [1] Section 192.042 requires property appraisers to assess all real property according to its just value as of January 1 of each year....

...However, if improvements to a parcel of property are not substantially completed on January 1, no valuation is to be placed on those improvements for that year. We hold that: (1) Sunset Harbour Condominium Association waived any objection to the property appraiser's affirmative defense that section 192.042 is unconstitutional; and (2) section 192.042 reasonably implements the provisions of article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution (which directs the Legislature to prescribe regulations that will secure a just valuation of property) and, therefore, is constitutional....

...The Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser, Joel Robbins, determined that the structure was substantially complete as of January 1, 1997, and assessed the property a value of $22,935,100. The Sunset Harbour Condominium Association filed suit and argued that under section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1997), the improvements to the property should have been assessed no value because the condominium was not "substantially complete" on January 1, 1997....

...ressed by several amici curiae. The Florida Department of Revenue was named by Sunset Harbour as a party defendant in the original action, as required by statute. The department joined *928 Sunset Harbour as an appellant after the circuit court held section 192.042 to be unconstitutional. We begin our analysis by determining whether Sunset Harbour preserved its objection to Robbins' standing to raise the affirmative defense. We also address the constitutionality of section 192.042. I. FAILURE TO RAISE AN OBJECTION TO THE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Sunset Harbour and amici curiae argue that Robbins lacked standing to raise the constitutionality of section 192.042 as an affirmative defense....

...State, 471 So.2d 32, 35 (Fla.1985). Because an objection to the availability of this affirmative defense to the property appraiser was not made at the trial court or the district court, we hold that any objection to the defense was waived. II. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF SECTION 192.042, FLORIDA STATUTES Having held that Sunset Harbour waived any objection to the affirmative defense asserted by Robbins, we now address the constitutionality of section 192.042. Robbins argues that section 192.042(1) is unconstitutional because article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution requires all property and structures to be assessed at fair market value, regardless of whether the structures are substantially completed. He argues that section 192.042(1) creates an unconstitutional fifth exception to the just valuation requirement in article VII, section 4....

...to fulfill the intent of the people, never to defeat it." Gray v. Bryant, 125 So.2d 846, 852 (Fla.1960). B. THE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION STATUTE AFTER CULBERTSON In 1968 this Court upheld the constitutionality of section 193.11, [5] the predecessor to section 192.042, [6] under the 1885 version of the constitution....

...who owned it. If the lot had been sold, the land was taxed; if it had not been sold, the land was not taxed. The Court also noted its concern that assessment standards and criteria might be manipulated to favor certain taxpayers over others. Unlike section 192.042(1), the statute at issue in Interlachen did not permit a "just valuation" of all property....

...re us. The Fourth and Fifth District Courts of Appeal have recognized this fact. Indeed, they have relied on Culbertson to uphold the constitutionality of the same statute at issue in this case. In 1983, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that section 192.042 did not violate article VII, section 4 of the 1968 constitution....

...has established a specific statutory scheme for the timing of the valuation and assessment). One of these determinations, of course, was when the various types of property would be assessed. The Legislature fulfilled its constitutional obligation in section 192.042, which states in part: All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: (1) Real property, on January 1 of each year....

...Improvements or portions not substantially completed on January 1 shall have no value placed thereon. "Substantially completed" shall mean that the improvement or some self-sufficient unit within it can be used for the purpose for which it was constructed. *932 § 192.042, Fla. Stat. (1997). This statute reflects the Legislature's intent to delay valuation of improvements to property until such time as these improvements are substantially completed. In upholding the constitutionality of a predecessor statute to section 192.042(1), this Court noted the timing decision contemplated by the statutory scheme....

...State, 733 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 1999): The constitution requires the Legislature to enact the general law regarding the collection of ad valorem taxes, and the Legislature has established a specific statutory scheme for the timing of the valuation and assessment. Section 192.042(1) makes clear that partial year assessments are not authorized for improvements to real property substantially completed after January 1, which "shall have no value placed thereon." There is no ambiguity in the statute....

...Seacoast Towers East, Inc., 212 So.2d 646 (Fla.1968). We do the same here. While the constitution requires a just valuation of all property, the Legislature is given the responsibility for deciding the specifics of how that just valuation is secured. We hold that section 192.042 is a reasonable and, therefore, constitutional implementation of article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution. CONCLUSION We hold that: (1) Sunset Harbour waived any objection to the property appraiser's affirmative defense that section 192.042 is unconstitutional; and (2) section 192.042 does not violate article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution....

...tax year. The taxpayer appealed the assessment to the Dade County Value Adjustment Board. The board reduced the value of the assessment. Robbins brought an action in circuit court to defend his original tax assessment of the building. He argued that section 192.042 was unconstitutional. The trial court adopted the General Master's finding that section 192.042 was unconstitutional. On appeal, a three-judge panel of the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the decision and held that section 192.042 was constitutional. ( Fuchs I ). On rehearing en banc, the Third District affirmed the decision of the circuit court, holding that section 192.042 was unconstitutional....

...nd should expressly disavow the dictum in Lewis and Fuchs III. 70 So.2d at 350. There is no defensive posture exception to the Atlantic Coast Line rule. PARIENTE, C.J., concurs. NOTES [1] We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. [2] Section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1997), provides: All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: (1) Real property, on January 1 of each year....

...Improvements or portions not substantially completed on January 1 shall have no value placed thereon. "Substantially completed" shall mean that the improvement or some self-sufficient unit within it can be used for the purpose for which it was constructed. [3] The trial court in Fuchs declared section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes, unconstitutional....

...In making these changes, the Legislature indicated that "the substantive impact of every section is completely unchanged." See id. § 4, at 257 (revisor's note). In 1970, the Legislature reorganized and simplified the ad valorem taxation statutes. Section 193.071 was repealed and section 192.042 took its place. See ch. 70-243, § 4, at 713, § 49, at 740, Laws of Florida. [6] Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1997), states: All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: (1) Real property, on January 1 of each year....

...d by the dictum in Fuchs III. Indeed, we must reaffirm the essential rule of State ex rel. Atlantic Coast Line Railway Co. v. State Board of Equalizers, 84 Fla. 592, 94 So. 681 (1922). See Barr, 70 So.2d at 350. [8] The trial court in Fuchs declared section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes, unconstitutional....

...ties." (Now § 196.191(14) (a), F.S. 1970, F.S.A.) [2] "No assessment shall be held invalid unless suit is instituted within sixty days from the time when the assessment roll is certified, as provided in § 193.29." [3] The applicable statute now is § 192.042 F.S....

...valorem taxes. Chapter 192 includes provisions requiring all property to be assessed, except inventories, see section 192.011, and, as pertinent here, provisions regarding the date that "[a]ll property shall be assessed according to its just value." § 192.042. Section 192.042(1) provides that real property is to be assessed on January 1 of each year and that "[i]mprovements or portions not substantially completed[ [4] ] on January 1 shall have no value placed thereon....

...Adams, 702 So.2d 1253, 1255 (Fla.1997). The constitution requires the Legislature to enact the general law regarding the collection of ad valorem taxes, and the Legislature has established a specific statutory scheme for the timing of the valuation and assessment. Section 192.042(1) makes clear that partial year assessments are not authorized for improvements to real property substantially completed after January 1, which "shall have no value placed thereon." There is no ambiguity in the statute....

...A "mill" is one-tenth of one cent, Black's Law Dictionary 993 (6th ed.1990), i.e., "one one-thousandth" of a dollar. § 192.001(10). [4] "`Substantially completed' shall mean that the improvement or some self-sufficient unit within it can be used for the purpose for which it was constructed." § 192.042(1)....

...was designed for and restricted to hospital usage, but was not in actual use for hospital purposes, was not entitled to exemption from ad valorem taxation for the year 1974. The taxable status of property is determined on January 1 of each year. See Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1973)....

...ort and the marina. Three Tax Years Insofar as pertinent, the same constitutional and statutory provisions govern in all three tax years in question. The rule has long been: The taxable status of property is determined on January 1 of each year. See Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1973)....

...This is purportedly contrary to the opinion of this Court in Straughn v. K & K Land Management, Inc., supra. The circuit court based its invalidation of Section 193.461(4)(a)4 on the second ground. The taxable status of property is determined on January 1 of each year. Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1975)....

...3d DCA 1999) (on rehearing en banc), which involved two consolidated cases in which the Third District Court of Appeal had determined, conversely, that the property appraiser in that posture does have standing to challenge the constitutionality of such a statute. The Third District additionally declared section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1993) (the "substantial completion" statute) to be unconstitutional....

...ements were not "substantially complete." The property appraiser then filed a complaint pursuant to section 194.036, challenging the VAB's decision. In so doing, the appraiser challenged the constitutionality of the "substantial completion" statute, section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1993)....

...The lien securing the property taxes operates retroactively and becomes fixed on the property as of January 1 of a tax year, even though the property tax is not yet due and owing until April 1st of the following year. Thus by operation of the relation-back doctrine, Fla.Stat. § 192.053 and § 192.042 (1991), the claim of Tax Collector is clearly a secured claim, albeit a lien which attached to the property in question as of the first day of the tax year, securing an amount yet to be determined....

...s entitled to a seventh priority, not an administrative expense priority of the estate. In support thereof, the debtor summarizes the Florida taxing procedure as follows: Property is assessed as of the first day of January of the taxable year as per § 192.042 of the Florida Statutes....

...This is an appeal from a final judgment in which the trial court concluded the following: 1) that the improvements [1] to appellee's property on January 1, 1979, were not substantially completed, i.e., they were not at the point at which they could be used; and 2) that section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1977), [2] is constitutional on the basis of Culbertson v....

...year. [6] DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Appellee is the owner of an ocean front hotel in Fort Lauderdale. The subject improvements were 103 additional hotel rooms in a separate building constructed east of the existing main facilities. [2] Section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1977), provides for the just valuation of property as follows: Real property, on January 1 of each year....

...Collier County involved a rather transparent attempt by a local government to collect ad valorem taxes on those properties which, because of improvements not substantially complete on January 1 of a given tax year, have historically escaped tax liability for up to twenty-seven months after completion of the improvements. See § 192.042(1), Fla....

...Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of a final judgment following a trial without jury in which the court upheld the 1971 real property tax assessment for improvements on plaintiff's property. This case requires careful consideration of Section 192.042(1), Fla. Stat., F.S.A., [1] enacted by the Legislature in 1970, in light of the statute's intended purpose. The instant cause also requires this court to reconcile, if possible, Section 192.042(1) with the provisions of Section 711.19(1), Fla....

...s correct in assessing the common elements of the building which the court found to be substantially completed on January 1, 1971, the taxing date, and the judge upheld the tax assessment. The appellant contends the trial judge erred in (1) applying Section 192.042(1) to the entire condominium building rather than to each individual parcel and (2) in upholding the assessment of "portions" of condominium buildings if they do not constitute "self-sufficient units." We have meticulously considered the record, all of the points in the briefs, and arguments of counsel, and have concluded that the trial court's construction of Section 192.042(1) was correct. As the trial judge noted in his final judgment, the obvious intent of the Legislature *132 in enacting Section 192.042(1) was to rectify inequities in former Section 193.11(4)....

...Legislatures may do things the courts think odd, but if their acts are within constitutional limitations we may not change them . .." Appellant concedes the new substantial completion law was intended to rectify inequities in the former statute. However, appellant argues that the new language of Section 192.042(1) now permits assessments of individual condominium parcels which are substantially completed as of the taxing date, even though the common elements may not be substantially completed as of the same date, thus alleviating the problem in Culbertson v....

...ally completed does violence to the Florida Condominium Act, particularly Section 711.19(1). This subsection provides that each condominium parcel shall be separately assessed for ad valorem taxes. The trial court harmonized the condominium law with Section 192.042(1) by ordering the tax assessor to prorate the taxable portions of the common elements among the individual condominium parcel owners. It should be recognized that when the Legislature enacted Section 192.042(1) in 1970, the condominium act was in effect....

...We cannot see that the Legislature intended for the assessment of improvements in accordance with the substantial completion law to apply any differently to condominium buildings than to apartment buildings or other highrises. "Improvements" as the word is used in Section 192.042(1) acquires further meaning *133 by reference to Section 192.001(12) wherein real property is defined to include "land, buildings, fixtures and all other improvements to land." Section 192.042(1) permits the tax assessor to find that "portions" of improvements, which may include building fixtures and other common elements of the property, are substantially completed....

...ted. We do not think appellant affirmatively has presented sufficient proof to justify overturning the assessment. Therefore, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited and discussed, the judgment appealed is affirmed. Affirmed. NOTES [1] Section 192.042(1) provides: "All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: "(1) Real property....

...The taxes and special assessments levied against each condominium parcel shall constitute a lien only upon such condominium parcel so assessed and upon no other portion of the condominium property." [3] Section 193.11(4) was changed to Section 193.071(4), F.S.A., before the statute was superseded by the present Section 192.042(1)....

...tion 196.1978. First, "[u]nless expressly exempted" all real property in the state is subject to taxation. § 196.001(1), Fla. Stat. (2004). [1] Second, by statute, real property is assessed "according to its just value" on January 1st of each year. § 192.042(1), *685 Fla....

...Hugh S. Glickstein of Law Offices of Judson A. Samuels and Hugh S. Glickstein, Hollywood, for appellees. WALDEN, Judge. This is a tax assessment case. It turns upon the application of the term, "substantially completed," as defined and intended under Section 192.042(1), 1970 Supp. to F.S. 1969, F.S.A.: "192.042 Date of assessments....

...s the certificate of occupancy was issued. It is not reflected that the building was unoccupied because of the reasons cited by the trial court, but due to lack of sales and economics. In order to satisfy the "substantially completed" requirement of Section 192.042(1), supra, it is not necessary that a building be 100% finished....

...on adopted by any governmental body or agency or the Governor when the moratorium prohibits or restricts the development or improvement of property as otherwise authorized by applicable law; (3) The location of said property; ... . (Emphasis added.) Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1983) provides: Date of assessment....

...Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GODERICH, JJ. Opinion Granting Rehearing En Banc July 16, 1999. LEVY, Judge. This appeal arises from a lower court Order upholding the Property Appraiser's original assessment of the Miami Beach Ocean Resort and declaring section 192.042, Florida Statutes unconstitutional....

...[1] A general master was appointed to hear the matter pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490. At trial, the Appraiser established that he conformed to the eight factors enumerated in section 193.011, Florida Statutes (1991). In response, the Taxpayer argued that pursuant to section 192.042 the subject property was not substantially completed as of January 1, 1992, and as a result thereof should have no value placed upon it for the 1992 tax year....

...[2] The Appraiser responded that section 192. 942 was unconstitutional and therefore his original assessment should stand. The General Master found that the Taxpayer established the subject property was not substantially completed as of January 1, 1992, as defined in section 192.042, but found that section 192.042 was unconstitutional....

...The trial court adopted the recommendation and incorporated by reference the General Master's Report in its Order. The Taxpayer challenges the Order and argues that the Property Appraiser, as a constitutional officer, does not have standing to challenge the validity of section 192.042....

...However, where operation of a statute is brought into issue by another party in the litigation, the officer may, in defense, question the validity of the statute. Id. Here, it was the Taxpayer who raised the issue of whether the property was substantially completed pursuant to section 192.042. The Property Appraiser challenged the validity of section 192.042 after the taxpayer put forth evidence showing that the property was not "substantially complete" on January 1, 1992. Accordingly, we find that the Property Appraiser had standing to challenge the validity of section 192.042, Florida Statutes pursuant to Department of Educ. v. Lewis, 416 So.2d 455 (Fla.1982). We further find that this holding is consistent with section 194.036, Florida Statutes. We disagree with the lower court and expressly hold that section 192.042, Florida Statutes, is constitutional....

...At the outset, we note that the Supreme Court of Florida upheld the constitutionality of a similar statute in Culbertson v. Seacoast Towers East, Inc., 212 So.2d 646 (Fla. 1968); see also Hausman v. Bayrock Investment Co., 530 So.2d 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)(finding that the validity of section 192.042(1) is settled by Culbertson v....

...Seacoast Towers East, Inc., 212 So.2d 646 (Fla.1968) and Markham v. Yankee Clipper Hotel, Inc., 427 So.2d 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)); Markham v. Yankee Clipper Hotel, Inc., 427 So.2d 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), rev. denied 434 So.2d 888 (Fla.1983)(holding that section 192.042(1) does not violate the "just valuation" clause of Article VII, section 4)....

...VII, § 4 (1968); see also Yankee Clipper, 427 So.2d at 384 n. 3 (finding that "[t]he constitutional change in 1968 is insignificant."). The 1968 Amendment, like the 1885 constitution, requires that regulations secure a "just valuation" of all property. Unlike section 192.042(1), the statute at issue in Interlachen did not permit a "just valuation" of all property....

...on who owned it; to-wit, if the lot had been sold the land was taxed, if it had not been sold the land was not taxed. Here, all property not substantially complete by January 1st is not taxed for that particular year. *341 Accordingly, we find that section 192.042 does not create an additional exemption in violation of Article VII, section 4....

...We note that it is the Legislature, acting through statutes that it passes, that has the recognized authority to determine the date upon which valuation and assessment of property shall take place, to-wit: January 1st of each calendar year. See Fla. Stat. § 192.042 (1997)....

...Reversed. Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT, JORGENSON, COPE, LEVY, GERSTEN, [*] GODERICH, GREEN, FLETCHER, SHEVIN, and SORONDO, JJ. ON REHEARING EN BANC FLETCHER, Judge. We grant rehearing en banc and affirm the decision of the trial court which held section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1991) to be unconstitutional....

...59, 298 A.2d 69 (1972)(where a partially completed nursing home was subjected to an eminent domain action, use of cost approach "entirely appropriate"). Thus, on January 1, 1992, the incomplete hotel structure had an uncontested just valuation of $3,790,227. The owners, however, invoked section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1991) which provides in relevant part: "All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: (1) Real property, on January 1 of each year....

...There, we determined that the legislature cannot establish different classes of property for tax purposes other than those enumerated in article VII, section 4 of the Florida Constitution...." [12] 543 So.2d at 216. Nonetheless, the owner urges us to conclude that section 192.042(1), even though it leads inexorably to tax assessment valuations at less than just valuation, is not in violation of the state constitution....

...The requirement is simply that the separate classification of such property shall bear some reasonable relationship to the legislative power to prescribe regulations to secure a just evaluation of property." 212 So.2d at 647. The owner's argument, derived from the *345 above language of Seacoast, [14] that the present section 192.042(1) is simply another regulation enacted to secure just valuation (fair market value), as mandated by the constitution, is without any basis in reality....

...Maxcy, then Seacoast was also clearly displaced by Interlachen. The owner's reliance upon Seacoast and its outdated logic is erroneous. After the issuance of the panel opinion herein, and before the en banc oral argument, the Florida Supreme Court issued a decision involving section 192.042(1)....

...The supreme court held the county's ordinance invalid for two reasons: (1) the ordinance did not impose a valid special assessment or fee, but rather an unauthorized, thus impermissible, tax; [23] and (2) the ordinance conflicted with the statutory ad valorem tax scheme including section 192.042(1), enacted by the legislature....

...Obviously county tax ordinances do not trump state general tax law; in the event of a conflict the state general tax law prevails. It has been suggested to us that the supreme court's decision in Collier County v. State requires us to conclude that section 192.042(1) is constitutional—even though the statute's constitutionality was not an issue (as the supreme court noted therein), or even discussed. Apparently the reasoning behind the suggestion is that the supreme court would not have expended its energies on explaining the effect of section 192.042(1) if it were unconstitutional, even in the absence of a constitutional challenge....

...the rights of the parties was not presented to the lower court, and is not now before this Court. At this point it is assumed, but not decided, that the law is a valid enactment." [emphasis supplied] Because there was no constitutional challenge to section 192.042(1) in Collier County, the supreme court, following precedent, interpreted the effect of the statute on the ordinance. Certainly we cannot abdicate our function of judging the validity of the *348 statute because the supreme court properly discussed and applied it under the required assumption of its validity. The additional suggestion has been made that section 192.042(1) is a "timing" statute and thus is valid as it is merely procedural in nature, part of the process of assessing, levying, and collecting taxes. Presumably the reasoning is that section 192.042(1) has no substantive effect, thus it is valid as being just a cog on the wheel of the legislative taxing scheme....

...l taxing date at a figure far below that which the constitution commands, and results in the highly substantive, permanent loss of large sums in tax dollars, as evidenced by not only all we have previously stated, but by Collier County itself. While section 192.042(1) is a timing regulation, it is also a substantive one. But when all is said and done it is clear that whatever section 192.042(1) is, it is not any kind of regulation that secures fair market value (just valuation) of all property, as constitutionally mandated....

...izes it, legislation which singles out properties or classifications of properties for treatment that brings about their tax assessment valuation at something other than fair market value violates article VII, section 4, Florida Constitution (1968). Section 192.042(1) does exactly that. We therefore grant the petition for rehearing en banc, withdraw the panel opinion to the extent it conflicts with this opinion, and affirm the decision of the circuit court holding section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1991) unconstitutional. [24] SORONDO, J. (concurring) I agree with the majority opinion that section 192.042(1) Florida Statutes (1991), is unconstitutional. I write separately to address the issue of the Appraiser's standing to raise a constitutional challenge to the statute in this case. Fuchs and amicus curiae both argue that the Appraiser lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of section 192.042(1)....

...Accordingly, even if the Appraiser had not raised the constitutional issue in a defensive posture, he had standing to raise it under the "public funds" exception. NOTES [1] Only the assessment of the building is at issue in the instant dispute. [2] Section 192.042(1) provides that real property be assessed on January 1 of each year with the exception that "[i]mprovements or portions not substantially completed on January 1 shall have no value placed thereon." [3] Section 195.062(1) provided tha...

...Yankee Clipper Hotel, 427 So.2d 383, 384 n. 3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). This overlooking of Interlachen led the Fourth District Court to conclude erroneously that the outdated Seacoast decision was still viable and controlling, thus resulting in its opinion upholding section 192.042(1)....

...AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part. GRIFFIN, C.J., and PETERSON, J., concur. NOTES [1] Final Judgment was entered against Sugarmill on June 5, 1996 and against Love on July 3, 1996. [2] Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So.2d 56 (Fla.1977); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976). [3] § 192.042; Bass v....

...This is obvious from the committee comment appearing as the last paragraph of that section of the amendment, as follows: "Committee Comment — This section is a comprehensive definition section including definitions previously found in sections 192.031, 192.042, 192.052, 192.064, and 193.511, and opinions of the Florida supreme court....

...Specific provisions are included for real property, tangible personal property, inventory and intangible personal property, in separate subsections. There is conspicuously absent from this section any reference whatever to household goods and personal effects. Again, Section 192.042 Florida Statutes 1977, contains essential provisions with respect *1108 to the assessment and valuation date of property....

...[8] Section 192.001 "Definitions", subsection (11)(a), (b), (c) and (d). [9] So-called, by the Department. The argument that this amendment created four "categories" of taxable personal property provides perhaps the major thrust for appellant's position. [10] The Committee Comment following amended Section 192.032 and Section 192.042, added to Chapter 192 by Chapter 70-243, Laws of Florida, 1970, states that these provisions as to situs and effective date of taxation apply to "all forms of property"....

...The complaint did not challenge the amounts of those valuations, but claimed illegality of the assessment for including valuation of the improvement consisting of the apartment building, on the asserted ground that the building was not substantially completed on January 1, 1971, citing § 192.042(1) Fla....

...The plaintiff sought a judgment eliminating valuation of the improvement, and thereby to reduce the assessment to $79,525. By answer the defendants denied the allegation that the building was not substantially completed on January 1, 1971. Applicable to assessment to the real property in question, for the year 1971, was § 192.042(1) Fla....

...For the tax year involved in the Seacoast Towers case, the taxability or non-taxability of an improvement depended upon whether the entire improvement (apartment building) was substantially completed by January first. However, under the law as presently amended (§ 192.042(1) Fla....

...Upon remand, a determination should be made by the court from the evidence, and additional evidence if the court finds it necessary or advisable to receive the same, as to the portions of the building which were substantially completed on January 1, 1971, as provided for in § 192.042(1) Fla....

...Another example may be found in the recent case of Lake Worth Towers, Inc. v. Gerstung, 1972, 262 So.2d 1, 4. There the tax assessor had admittedly included in the assessed value of real property the value of an improvement which was not substantially completed on January 1 of the tax year, contrary to § 192.042, F.S....

...al, is determined by its use as of that date. Bass v. General Development Corp., 374 So.2d 479, 482 (Fla. 1979); Lanier v. Overstreet, 175 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1965); Haines v. Holley, 234 So.2d 152 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 238 So.2d 428 (Fla. 1970); § 192.042, Fla....

...low future purchasers to have input into the choice of finishing touches. Notwithstanding the trial judge stated: "... the court finds that the residences located on the lots here involved were substantially complete within the intent and meaning of § 192.042, Florida Statutes, on ... January 1st, 1975 ... and that plaintiff has failed to carry the burden of presenting proof which excludes every reasonable hypothesis of the legality of the assessments made by the property appraiser..." We do not agree. Section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1975) reads in part: "All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: 1....

...the six dwelling units here are each self-contained units, no way dependent on other units. Each one standing by itself either is or is not "substantially complete." Further in the context of multi-family dwellings we again refer to our citation of Section 192.042(1) in which the language speaks of "......

...Hausman, Orange County Property Appraiser, appeals from a final judgment declaring that no value should be attributed to four buildings in a five building shopping center in Orange County, Florida, for the tax year 1986 because on January 1, 1986, they were not substantially complete. Hausman also argues that *939 section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1985) [1] is unconstitutional because it excludes from taxation valuable, albeit incomplete, improvements on realty, thereby offending the mandate in section 4, Article VII, Florida Constitution, 1968, that all p...

...applied to just the one building admittedly not complete, or one or more of the four involved in this suit. Utilities were available at the site, although connections to the buildings had not yet been made. The test for substantial completion under section 192.042(1) is similar to that under section 193.071(4)....

...Further, the concept of "substantial completion" should be given a liberal interpretation in view of the constitution's just valuation mandate. Manufacturers National Corp. v. Blake, 287 So.2d 129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973), cert. den., 294 So.2d 91 (Fla. 1974); Kauffman. REVERSED. ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1985) reads as follows: 192.042 Date of assessment....

...Williams, Assistant County Attorneys, for appellee. Before GREEN, RAMIREZ, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM. The taxpayer, a condominium under construction, challenged property appraiser's valuation for the tax year 1997 in the amount of $22,000,000.00, arguing that, pursuant to Section 192.042, Florida Statutes, it should have received a zero value for ad valorem taxation because it was not "substantially completed" as of January 1 of the tax year. The property appraiser put up a general denial with an affirmative defense asserting the constitutional invalidity of Section 192.042, Florida Statutes, supra. The trial judge agreed with the property appraiser and held Section 192.042 unconstitutional....

...his Court in Fuchs v. Robbins, 738 So.2d 338, 341-348 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). [1] We incorporate and adopt Judge Fletcher's opinion as though it were set out fully. Employing that reasoning and analysis, we agree with the trial judge *1182 and hold that Section 192.042, Florida Statutes is unconstitutional....

...In making that assertion, the developers gloss over two facts: they applied for a permit to construct, and received a Certificate of Occupancy for, a shell structure; and the value placed by the tax assessor on the property and improvements would have been much higher had all of the tenant spaces been completed. Section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1977), provides that substantially completed means "that the improvement or some self-sufficient unit within it can be used for the purpose for which it was constructed." Although the developers here may have had...

...FLETCHER, Judge. Brent D. Klein and Laura M. Klein appeal an adverse summary judgment in this action wherein the Kleins are challenging the year 2001 tax assessment valuation on a newly constructed home. At issue is the status of the home in relation to section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (2001), which provides: "Improvements or portions not substantially completed on January 1 shall have no value placed thereon....

...Even though the trial court may have erred in admitting the parol evidence to explain its provisions we find such error harmless since the result should have been the same without its admission. Accordingly, the trial court's judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED. DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 192.042(1) provides: Date of assessment....

...d valorem taxes on the demised property. Id. Therefore, to use ad valorem taxes assessed on the unimproved property in the year prior to the placement of the demised premises on the tax rolls (1971) would be "inconsistent and illogical." Id. (citing § 192.042(1), Fla....

...red judgment for Wellington. Based on the foregoing, we reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court to enter summary judgment in favor of Wellington. *924 Reversed and Remanded with Directions. GUNTHER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1983), provided: Date of assessment....

...irection in the legislation as to how the duties associated with the assessment and collection of such taxes for the Wedge property will be affected. Section 192.011 , requires the property appraiser to assess all property located within the county. Section 192.042 (1), Florida Statues, provides that real property shall be assessed on January 1 of each year....

the exemption in s. 196.1978, Fla. Stat.). 6 Section 192.042(1), Fla. Stat. 7 See ss. 196.012(1), 196.192

subject to taxation on the January 1 tax day. Section 192.042, F.S. Absent any authority to the contrary

...Section 193.092(1) appears under the title “Assessment of property for back taxes.” And “back taxes” describes taxes assessed and collected after the time set for the assessment by statute. In Florida, ad valorem taxes are assessed annually. § 192.042, Fla. Stat....

...d from a prior homestead to a new homestead. 7 Since the date of tax assessments for real property is January 1, an effective date “beginning with the 2021 tax roll” is not in conflict with an effective date of January 1, 2021. See § 192.042(1), Fla....

...nst property acquired by a county during that portion of the year prior to such acquisition and the cancellation of the remainder of such taxes for that year. Sincerely, Robert A. Butterworth Attorney General RAB/tgh 1 Section 196.001 , Fla. Stat. 2 Section 192.042 , Fla....

forth in s. 193.511, F. S. AS TO QUESTION 2: Section 192.042, F. S., provides in pertinent part: 192

...The pertinent statute provided an exemption from ad valorem taxation for property *29 used by Florida corporations not for profit as a home for the aged and for uses related to such a home. Under the law of this state, the taxable status of property is determinable as of 1 January. See Section 192.04, F.S.1967 (now Section 192.042, F.S....

...eady for occupation. The trial court found in favor of Two M., and it is from that finding that Mikos has filed this appeal. Mikos contends that his assessment of the subject twenty-four units as substantially completed shell units is in accord with section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1987), which provides in pertinent part: All property shall be assessed according to its just value as follows: (1) Real property, on January 1 of each year....

...As in our case of Colding v. Klausmeyer, 387 So.2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980), and the case of Hausman v. Bayrock Inv. Co., 530 So.2d 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), the troublesome issue of what constitutes a substantially completed improvement subject to assessment under section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes (1987), is again presented....

...at 33. Finally, contrary to the First District’s conclusion and Panama Commons’ argument, Panama Commons’ right to the exemption under section 196.1978 for the 2013 tax year did not vest on January 1, 2013. The First District reached this conclusion by relying on section 192.042, Florida Statutes (2013); however, that section is inapplicable here. Section 192.042 simply provides that on January 1 of each tax year “[a]ll property shall be assessed [by the county property appraiser] according to its just value.” This case does not involve a dispute regarding the property’s just value....

...§§ 197.172 (4) and (1) respectively. At the Hearing, the parties agreed they had to meet to determine a sum certain tax amount. . Florida Engineered states that the debtor's taxes were assessed in November of 1991, in *65 truth, however, pursuant to § 192.042 of the Florida Statutes, they were assessed (incurred) in January 1, 1991, and actually became payable in November of 1991.

provisions of s. 192.042(1), F.S., apply. Section 192.042(1), F.S., states: All property shall be assessed

...Property Appraiser Crapo then filed a motion for rehearing en banc, which we granted. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.331(d). II. Merits: The Exemption Real property in Florida is annually assessed and subject to an ad valorem tax unless an exemption applies. Art. VII, § 4, Fla. Const.; §§ 192.042, 196.001(1), Fla....

...foundational to the understanding of tax law, and has been extended to the context of tax exemptions and not merely valuations. Page v. City of Fernandina Beach, 714 So. 2d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (“The taxable status of property is determined on January 1 of each year. See Section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1973)....

...Robbins, 873 So.2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004), in which the Third District Court of Appeal cited as controlling authority its decision in Sunset Harbour North Condominium Ass’n v. Robbins, 837 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (declaring unconstitutional section 192.042, Florida Statutes (1997)), rev’d, 914 So.2d 925 (Fla.2005)....

...beneficial title in equity to real property in this state; and a permanent residency in the state, Art. VII, s. 6(b), State Const. and s. 196.031 (1), F.S. The status and ownership of the property on January 1 under general law governs its taxation. Section 192.042 (1) and s....

tax-day statutes are presently in existence. Section 192.042, F. S., provides that all real property shall

...The zoning does not allow all 47 acres to be used for a church, and the church accordingly agreed to sell eleven acres to a developer to be used for non-church uses. As of January 1, 2000, the date on which the taxable status of the property was determined, § 192.042, Fla....

PER CURIAM. The taxpayer, a condominium under construction, challenged property appraiser’s valuation for the tax year 1997 in the amount of $22,000,000.00, arguing that, pursuant to Section 192.042, Florida Statutes, it should have received a zero -value for ad valorem taxation because it was not “substantially completed” as of January 1 of the tax year. The property appraiser put up a general denial with an affirmative defense asserting the constitutional invalidity of Section 192.042, Florida Statutes, supra. The trial judge agreed with the property appraiser and held Section 192.042 unconstitutional....

...his Court in Fuchs v. Robbins, 738 So.2d 338, 341-348 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). 1 We incorporate and adopt Judge Fletcher’s opinion as though it were set out fully. Employing that reasoning and analysis, we agree with the trial judge *1182 and hold that Section 192.042, Florida Statutes is unconstitutional....

...ing the amount of the taxes are those established by state law. See In re Liuzzo, 204 B.R. 235, 237 (Bankr.M.D.Fla. 1996). The Property Appraiser is required to appraise all taxable property as of January 1 of the current tax year. Florida Statutes, Section 192.042....

...Flood Control District (South Florida Water Management District) and the Southwest Florida Water Management District on July 1, 1975, such changes would have no effect on the levy of ad valorem taxes by said districts for 1975. See s. 373.149 , F.S. Section 192.042 , F.S., provides that real and tangible personal property is to be assessed according to its just value as of January 1 of each year....

property appraiser and is not a violation of Section 192.042, Florida Statutes. 15. ... The issue is whether

...property owned by municipalities and used for governmental, municipal, or public purposes is exempt from ad valorem taxation. In this instance, however, the subject property has been assessed for ad valorem tax purposes for the tax year pursuant to section 192.042 , Florida Statutes....

...ut fulfills a municipal purpose. 2 See Greater Orlando Aviation Authority v. Crotty, 775 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), citing Orlando Utilities Commission v. Milligan, 229 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969), cert. denied, 237 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 1970). 3 Section 192.042 (1), Fla....

...“retroactively to the 2013 tax roll.” Chs. 2013-72, § 11, at 1273-74, 2013-83, § 3, at 1325, Laws of Fla. In doing so, the Legislature implicitly recognized the taxable or tax exempt status of real property is determined on January 1 of each year under section 192.042, Florida Statutes....

...See id. The statutory scheme notwithstanding, under the majority opinion’s view, the “right”1 to a property tax exemption vests on January 1. But no Florida case holds that the “right” to a property tax exemption vests on January 1. The majority opinion relies ultimately on a single statutory subsection, section 192.042(1), 1 As a general rule, tax exemptions are not deemed vested rights and tax exemption statutes may be modified or repealed unless “their repeal would impair vested rights under a contract.” See 16A C.J.S....

...ts have, indeed, also held that January 1 is the determinative date for ascertaining the use to which potentially exempt property is put. See Dade Cnty. Taxing Auths. v. Cedars of Lebanon Hosp. Corp., 355 So. 2d 1202, 1204 (Fla. 1978) (relying on section 192.042[(1)], Florida Statutes); Page v....

...The Florida Constitution mandates the just valuation of all property for ad valo-rem tax purposes. Art. VII, § 4, Fla. Const.; Bystrom v. Whitman, 488 So.2d 520, 521 (Fla.1986). General law provides, concomitantly, that all real property shall be assessed according to its just value on January 1 of each year. See § 192.042(1), Fla....

...for review denied, 430 So.2d 450 (Fla.), and pet. for review denied, 430 So.2d 451 (Fla.1983). Therefore, because the POS was not approved until November 1998, and in light of the requirement that the assessment must be made as of January 1 pursuant to section 192.042(1), Florida Statutes, [4] the units were improperly *966 assessed as timeshares for the year 1998, but not for the year 1999....

...ation of all property for ad valorem taxation...." Art. VII, § 4, Fla. Const. The term "just valuation" means "fair market value." Mazourek, 831 So.2d at 88. All real property shall be assessed according to its just value on January 1 of each year. § 192.042, Fla....

...nt as of January 1. See Security Mgmt. Corp. v. Markham, 516 So.2d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 518 So.2d 1276 (Fla.1987). We note the decision in Sunset Harbour North Condominium Ass'n v. Robbins, 837 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), which held section 192.042 unconstitutional, citing Fuchs v....