CopyCited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 489, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 2717
...Florida Department of Revenue,
502 So.2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Under the mandatory jurisdiction of article V, section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution, we uphold the statute. Appellees (banks) filed suit challenging the validity of the franchise tax imposed on banks and savings associations by section
220.63, Florida Statutes (1985), on the ground that it violated the Federal Public Debt Statute, 31 U.S.C....
...The trial court upheld the statute and entered summary judgment against the banks. The First District Court of Appeal reversed and held the taxing statute invalid to the *116 extent that it purported "to include federal instrumentalities in its measure." Section 220.63, Florida Statutes (1985), states in pertinent part: (1) A franchise tax measured by net income is hereby imposed on every bank and savings association for each taxable year commencing on or after January 1, 1973, and for each taxable year which begins before and ends after January 1, 1973....
...The district court pointed out that the tax was measured by the adjusted federal income for the current tax year and imposed at the same rate as taxes are levied upon other corporations for the privilege of doing business in Florida. The court concluded that section 220.63 was the equivalent of an income tax and thereby invalid to the extent that it purported to include income from federal securities within its measure....
...e Federal Public Debt statute. Schwinden v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 691 P.2d 1351 (Mont. 1984), clarified, 730 P.2d 442 (Mont. 1986). Consistent with the legislative findings and declaration of intent contained in chapter 72-278, Laws of Florida, section 220.63 is a classic nonproperty excise tax on the privilege of operating a bank or savings association within the state....
...allenge grounded upon Florida's constitutional proscription against a personal income tax. There remains an additional question that must be answered which was not reached by the First District Court of Appeal because of its disposition of the case. Section 220.63 only falls within the exception contained in 31 U.S.C....
...e comparable state and local obligations. Florida's tax mandates the inclusion of all interest earned on federal, state and local debt obligations in the tax base for purposes of measuring the tax. Federal obligations are included in the tax base by section
220.63(3), which adopts the definition of "adjusted federal income" codified in section
220.13, Florida Statutes (1985)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Goldberg of Ervin, Varn, Jacobs, Odom & Kitchen, Tallahassee, for appellants. Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Linda Lettera, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellees. BOOTH, Chief Judge. This cause is before us on appeal from a summary judgment entered in favor of appellees upholding the validity of Section 220.63, Florida Statutes, [1] on the grounds that the tax thereby imposed on banks is a nondiscriminatory franchise tax for the privilege of doing corporate business in the state. [2] Section 220.63, Florida Statutes, is in pertinent part as follows: (1) A franchise tax measured by net income is hereby imposed on every bank and savings association of each taxable year commencing on or after January 1, 1973, and for each taxable year which begins before or ends after January 1, 1973....
...mputing a tax, except (1) a nondiscriminatory franchise tax or another nonproperty tax instead of a franchise tax, imposed on a corporation; and (2) an estate or inheritance tax. [emphasis added] Appellants claim that the tax levied upon banks by Section 220.63 does not fall within the above-quoted exception of Title 31, Section 3124(a)(1), United States Code, since the Florida bank "franchise" tax is nothing more than a mislabeled income tax....
...Educational Films Corporation v. Ward,
282 U.S. 379,
51 S.Ct. 170,
75 L.Ed. 400 (1931). Applying these basic principles to the case before us, we can find no basis for holding the tax is other than an income tax. On the contrary, the tax imposed by Section
220.63 operates in the same manner as the Florida corporate income tax....
...Both taxes are measured by adjusted federal income for the current tax year; [4] the rates imposed by each are identical, and both taxes are levied upon corporations for the privilege of doing business in the state. The only cognizable difference between the two taxes are the statutory labels, and even that is belied by Section 220.63 being made part of the "Florida Income Tax *966 Code." Finally, we note that the tax imposed by Section 220.68 is expressly in lieu of income tax imposed on other corporations....
...extent it purports to include federal instrumentalities in its measure. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings to determine the refund to which appellants are entitled. JOANOS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Section 220.63(2), Florida Statutes (1979), imposed a five percent tax which was increased to five and one-half percent applicable to years beginning on or after September 1, 1984....
