Ranniger v. Iowa Department of Revenue & Finance (2008)

While the State offers policy reasons for an expansive interpretation of the statute, we have repeatedly said that ‘“we are bound by what the legislature said, not by what it should or might have said.’ ” Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 270 (Iowa 2008) (quoting Iowa Dep’t of Transp. v. Soward, 650 N.W.2d 569, 571 (Iowa 2002)).

See id. (“The department’s more narrow view of the statute is consistent with [our strict construction against exemptions]; the taxpayers’ expansive view is not.”).

The department has “clearly been vested with discretion to interpret chapter 422.” Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 268 (Iowa 2008).

Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 268 (Iowa 2008).

Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 268 (Iowa 2008).

The department “has clearly been vested with discretion to interpret chapter 422, [so] we will reverse the department’s interpretation of section 422.7(21) only if it was ‘irrational, illogical or wholly unjustifiable.’” Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 268 (Iowa 2008) (internal citation omitted) (interpreting what constituted the “sale of a business” under section 422.7(21)(a)(1)); see Iowa Code § 17A.19(10)(l); cf. Christensen, 944 N.W.2d at 900–04…

Nor is the option available to rewrite the text of Iowa Code section 321J.13 to expand the scope of what can be raised in a license revocation proceeding. “[W]e have repeatedly said that ‘we are bound by what the legislature said, not by what it should or might have said.’ ” In re Marshall, 805 N.W.2d 145, 160 (Iowa 2011) (quoting Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 270 (Iowa 2008)).

Exemptions from taxation, therefore, are “ ‘construed strictly against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the taxing body.’ ” Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 269 (Iowa 2008) (quoting Iowa Auto Dealers Ass’n v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue, 301 N.W.2d 760, 762 (Iowa 1981)).

Exemptions from taxation, therefore, are “ ‘construed strictly against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the taxing body.’ ” Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 269 (Iowa 2008) (quoting Iowa Auto Dealers Ass’n v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue, 301 N.W.2d 760, 762 (Iowa 1981)).

See Ranniger v. Iowa Dept. of Revenue and Fin. , 746 N.W.2d 267 , 268 (Iowa 2008) (finding for Internal Revenue Code purposes the "sale of a business means the sale of all or substantially all of the tangible personal property or service of the business.") Indeed, as part of the asset-purchase agreement, Gardner was to be employed by CGB Diversified subject to a non-competition agreement precluding him from operating a similar business.

See, e.g., Ranniger v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 746 N.W.2d 267, 268 (Iowa 2008); City of Sioux City v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 666 N.W.2d 587, 590 (Iowa 2003).