Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 63949
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
| Writing for the Court | ADKINS; ALDERMAN |
| Citation | 455 So.2d 311 |
| Parties | EASTERN AIR LINES, INC., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 63949,63949 |
| Decision Date | 14 June 1984 |
Page 311
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 12, 1984.
Page 313
Joseph F. Jennings of Kimbrell, Hamann, Jennings, Womack, Carlson & Kniskern, Miami, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Joseph C. Mellichamp, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Larry Levy, General Counsel and Jane Mostoller, Asst. General Counsel, Dept. of Revenue, Tallahassee, for appellee.
ADKINS, Justice.
The case is before us on an order from the First District Court of Appeal certifying the issues in the case to be of great public importance. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(5), Fla. Const.
This case arose with the filing of a complaint by Eastern Air Lines in the circuit court of Leon county seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from the enforcement of provisions of chapter 83-3, Laws of Florida, on the grounds that the law was unconstitutional. Specifically, Eastern alleged that the law violated the equal protection and due process clauses of the Florida and United States Constitutions, was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority, and violated the commerce clause of the United States Constitution. By stipulation, the parties agreed to a procedure whereby Eastern was allowed to self-accrue the sales tax imposed under chapter 83-3, which became effective on April 1, 1983, during the pendency of the proceedings subject to certain conditions. The trial judge entered his final judgment in this case on May 27, 1983, incorporating the order he had entered in a similar action filed by Delta Airlines and upholding the constitutionality of chapter 83-3. On June 24, 1983, Eastern filed its notice of appeal with the First District Court of Appeal. On July 12, 1983, that court issued its order certifying the case for immediate resolution by this Court.
Chapter 83-3 was enacted during a special session of the Florida legislature which was called for the express purpose of addressing road transportation and public transit needs in the state. The law revises the tax structure of chapters 212 and 220 of the Florida Statutes. The new law eliminates one-half (4 cents) of the excise tax imposed by former chapter 206, Florida Statutes (1981), on fuel purchased for road transportation use and imposes a five percent sales tax on this fuel through the new Part II of former chapter 212, chapter 83-3, section 6. That section bases the five percent sales tax on a predetermined price for fuel of $1.148 per gallon. The new sales tax is imposed on all aviation jet fuel purchased by interstate air common carriers, but is not imposed on railroads and vessels due to the proration provision which applies to railroads and vessels allowing taxation based on cost and only on the carrier's intrastate mileage. Ch. 83-3, § 5 (amends § 212.08(4), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1982)). Section 5 of the law provides:
(4) EXEMPTIONS, ITEMS BEARING OTHER EXCISE TAXES, ETC.--Also exempt are water (not exempting mineral water or carbonated water), and; all fuels
Page 314
used by a public or private utility, including any municipal corporation or rural electric cooperative association, in the generation of electric power or energy for sale. Fuel other than motor fuel and special fuel is taxable as provided in this part, except that fuel expressly exempt herein. Motor fuels and special fuels are taxable as provided in part II, except that those used by vehicles, other than aircraft, which are licensed as common carriers by the Interstate Commerce Commission to transport persons or property in interstate or foreign commerce and vessels used to transport persons or property in interstate or foreign commerce are taxable only to the extent provided herein.The first issue which we will address is Eastern's contention that the proration provisions, which do not apply to airlines, violate concepts of equal protection by not treating all common carriers alike. Eastern asserts that all interstate carriers, whether they be airlines, railroads, trucks or vessels, are similarly situated for fuel tax purposes. The circuit court found that Eastern did not sustain its burden of demonstrating that the classification is hostile and oppressive and held that there "is no invidious discrimination by the creation of an arbitrary classification." The court's order states: "Classifying airlines differently from vessels and railroads for fuel tax purposes is not arbitrary. Airlines enjoy advantages and must tolerate some disadvantages due to their distinctive nature." The court cited the example of the airlines being exempt from ad valorem taxes on the lease of property from the county or other governmental unit pursuant to chapter 80-368, Laws of Florida, while vessels and railroads are not. The court also noted that proration of mileage for aircraft has proven difficult in the past because of flight patterns over the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean to avoid the accumulation of intrastate mileage.
When the state legislature, acting within the scope of its authority, undertakes to exert the taxing power, every presumption in favor of the validity of its action is indulged. Only clear and demonstrated usurpation of power will authorize judicial interference with legislative action. Walters v. City of St. Louis, 347 U.S. 231, 74 S.Ct. 505, 98 L.Ed. 660 (1954). In the field of taxation particularly, the legislature possesses great freedom in classification. The burden is on the one attacking the legislative enactment to negate every conceivable basis which might support it. Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83, 60 S.Ct. 406, 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940); Just Valuation & Taxation League, Inc. v. Simpson, 209 So.2d 229, 323 (Fla.1968). The state must, of course, proceed upon a rational basis and may not resort to a classification that is palpably arbitrary. Department of Revenue v. AMREP Corp., 358 So.2d 1343, 1349 (Fla.1978). A statute that discriminates in favor of a certain class is not arbitrary if the discrimination is founded upon a reasonable distinction or difference in state policy. Allied Stores v. Bowers, 358 U.S. 522, 79 S.Ct. 437, 3 L.Ed.2d 480 (1959).
We agree with the circuit court's conclusion that Eastern has not met its burden in attacking the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of South Miami v. DeSantis, Case No. 19-cv-22927-BLOOM/Louis
...still accomplish this intent." Martinez v. Scanlan , 582 So. 2d 1167, 1173 (Fla. 1991) (quoting E. Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue , 455 So. 2d 311, 317 (Fla. 1984) ). "The relevant inquiry is ‘whether the overall legislative intent is still accomplished without the invalid provisions.’......
-
Coral Springs Street Systems v. City of Sunrise, No. 03-11497.
...can still accomplish this intent." Martinez v. Scanlan, 582 So.2d 1167, 1173 (Fla.1991) (quoting E. Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 455 So.2d 311, 317 (Fla.1984)). The doctrine of severability, thus, "recognizes that federal courts have an affirmative duty to preserve the validity of l......
-
State v. Catalano, SC11–1166.
...the invalid provisions. See Martinez v. Scanlan, 582 So.2d 1167, 1173 (Fla.1991) (citing Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 455 So.2d 311, 317 (Fla.1984)). Section 316.3045(1)(a) prohibits individuals from amplifying sound inside their motor vehicles that is “plainly audible” more......
-
Martinez v. Scanlan, 77179
...negated." We do not find this to be an accurate statement of the law. As we stated in Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 455 So.2d 311, 317 (Fla.1984), appeal dismissed, 474 U.S. 892, 106 S.Ct. 213, 88 L.Ed.2d 214 It is a fundamental principle that a statute, if constitutiona......
-
City of South Miami v. DeSantis, Case No. 19-cv-22927-BLOOM/Louis
...still accomplish this intent." Martinez v. Scanlan , 582 So. 2d 1167, 1173 (Fla. 1991) (quoting E. Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue , 455 So. 2d 311, 317 (Fla. 1984) ). "The relevant inquiry is ‘whether the overall legislative intent is still accomplished without the invalid provisions.’......
-
Coral Springs Street Systems v. City of Sunrise, No. 03-11497.
...can still accomplish this intent." Martinez v. Scanlan, 582 So.2d 1167, 1173 (Fla.1991) (quoting E. Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 455 So.2d 311, 317 (Fla.1984)). The doctrine of severability, thus, "recognizes that federal courts have an affirmative duty to preserve the validity of l......
-
State v. Catalano, SC11–1166.
...the invalid provisions. See Martinez v. Scanlan, 582 So.2d 1167, 1173 (Fla.1991) (citing Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 455 So.2d 311, 317 (Fla.1984)). Section 316.3045(1)(a) prohibits individuals from amplifying sound inside their motor vehicles that is “plainly audible” more......
-
Martinez v. Scanlan, 77179
...negated." We do not find this to be an accurate statement of the law. As we stated in Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 455 So.2d 311, 317 (Fla.1984), appeal dismissed, 474 U.S. 892, 106 S.Ct. 213, 88 L.Ed.2d 214 It is a fundamental principle that a statute, if constitutiona......