DOROTHY B. OVEN, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN DAWIRS, APPELLEE
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 addresses who is responsible for paying a specific Florida sales tax on commercial leases when the lease agreement is silent on the matter. The court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the burden falls on the landlord.
The court held that when a commercial lease is silent as to the party responsible for paying the tax imposed by Section 212.03, Florida Statutes, the burden of payment falls on the landlord (lessor).
[1] When a commercial lease is silent as to responsibility for payment of the tax imposed by Section 212.03, Florida Statutes, the burden of payment falls on the landlord.
[2] The tax imposed by Section 212.031, Florida Statutes, is levied on the lessor for the privilege of engaging in the business of renting or leasing real property.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“The tax imposed by this section shall be in addition to the total amount of the rental and shall be charged by the lessor or person receiving the rent in and by a rental arrangement with the lessee or person paying the rental and shall be due and payable at the time of the receipt of such rental payment by the lessor or other person who receives said rental or payment.”
This quote from the statute outlines how the tax is to be charged and collected.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe commercial lease agreement between the landlord (appellant) and the tenant (appellee) did not specify who was responsible for paying the tax impos…
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.
[*1187] JOANOS, Judge.
This appeal involves the apparently novel question of whether, when a commercial lease is silent as to the party responsible for payment of the tax imposed by Section 212.03, Florida Statutes, the burden of payment falls on the landlord or the tenant. We affirm the judgment of the trial court and adopt the reasoning for the result expressed in the final judgment.
Section 212.031(3) provides, in pertinent part:
The tax imposed by this section shall be in addition to the total amount of the rental and shall be charged by the lessor or person receiving the rent in and by a rental arrangement with the lessee or person paying the rental and shall be due and payable at the time of the receipt of such rental payment by the lessor or other person who receives said rental or payment. (e.s.)
The trial court concluded:
[Wjhere the parties have failed to make provision for the burden of the payment of sales tax in the agreement entered into between them, ... such burden rests upon the lessor. We reach this conclusion for the reason that the lessor bears ultimate responsibility and liability to the State for the payment of such tax and for the further reason that Section 212.-031(l)(a), F.S. declares that it is the legislative intent that a person is exercising a taxable privilege who engages in the business of renting, leasing or letting any real property. We construe this to be a direction that the tax is one levied on the lessor. Appellee has brought to our attention the following additional support for the conclusion reached by the trial court: Green v. Panama City Housing Authority, 115 So. 2d 560 (Fla.1959); Gaulden v. Kirk, 47 So. 2d 567 (Fla.1950); Florida Department of Revenue v. Maas Brothers, Inc., 226 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969); and Kirk v. Western Contracting Corp., 216 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968). In each case the court noted that the tax involved is imposed on the privilege of engaging in the business of renting or leasing the property in question. The final judgment is AFFIRMED.
LARRY G. SMITH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989)…KOGAN, Justice. We have for review Noriega v. Schnurmacher Holding, Inc., 528 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), based on certified conflict with Oven v. Dawirs, 419 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and Spacelink of Florida, Inc. v. Golden Lakes Village Ass’n, 505 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. In 1985, Noriega leased a commercial property to Schnurmacher. The terms of t…
-
The Natural Kitchen, Inc. v. Am. Transworld Corp., 449 So. 2d 855 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…onsiderations due and payable for the privilege of occupancy .... Ad valorem taxes paid by the tenant or lessee to the landlord or lessor or to anyone else on behalf of the landlord are taxable as rent .... Natural Kitchen relies on Oven v. Dawirs, 419 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), construing section 212.031(3), Florida Statutes (1981), to mean that the landlord in a commercial lease is responsible for the payment of sales taxes where the parties have failed to make provision for this in the rental agreeme…
-
Coney v. Int'l Minerals & Chem. Corp., 425 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…v. Stevenson, 212 Tenn. 178, 368 S.W. 2d 760 (1963). Accordingly, we hold that the exclusiveness of remedy doctrine embodied in section 440.11(1) bars recovery by appellant against IMC for either compensatory or punitive damages. Sharpe v. Monfort, 419 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). AFFIRMED. OTT, C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gaulden v. Kirk, 47 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1950)
- Connell v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co., 115 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 1959)
- Kirk v. W. Contracting Corp., 216 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)
- Fla. Revenue Comm'n & Fred O. Dickinson, Jr. v. Maas Bros., Inc., 226 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)
- Wincor v. Miami Nat'l Bank, 216 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)