196.192
Exemptions from ad valorem taxation.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
196.192 Exemptions from ad valorem taxation.—Subject to the provisions of this chapter:
(1) All property owned by an exempt entity, including educational institutions, and used exclusively for exempt purposes shall be totally exempt from ad valorem taxation.
(2) All property owned by an exempt entity, including educational institutions, and used predominantly for exempt purposes shall be exempted from ad valorem taxation to the extent of the ratio that such predominant use bears to the nonexempt use.
(3) All tangible personal property loaned or leased by a natural person, by a trust holding property for a natural person, or by an exempt entity to an exempt entity for public display or exhibition on a recurrent schedule is exempt from ad valorem taxation if the property is loaned or leased for no consideration or for nominal consideration.
For purposes of this section, each use to which the property is being put must be considered in granting an exemption from ad valorem taxation, including any economic use in addition to any physical use. For purposes of this section, property owned by a limited liability company, the sole member of which is an exempt entity, shall be treated as if the property were owned directly by the exempt entity. This section does not apply in determining the exemption for property owned by governmental units pursuant to s. 196.199.
History.—s. 3, ch. 71-133; s. 2, ch. 88-102; s. 2, ch. 89-122; s. 3, ch. 2007-106; s. 2, ch. 2008-193.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases, 1972–2018 · leading case: Mastroianni v. Memorial Medical Center
Mastroianni v. Memorial Medical Center (1992)
“The property appraiser relied upon section 196.192, Florida Statutes (1989), for his position that the owner of the property must be an exempt entity for the property to be exempt from taxation.”
Diffenderfer v. Central Baptist Church of Miami, Florida, Inc. (1972)
“06) and enacted new legislation, approved June 15, 1971, effective December 31, 1971, which provides, in relevant part, that church property is exempt from taxation only if the property is used predominantly for religious purposes and only "to the extent of the ratio that such…”
FIRST UNION NAT. BANK OF FLA. v. Ford (1993)
“It held that to be entitled to the tax exemption under section 196.192, a tax exempt entity had to be the owner as well as the user and occupant of the property.”
Ocean Highway & Port Authority v. Page (1992)
“; § 196.192, Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1988). Thus, under the plain language of section 196.”
LEON CO. EDUC. AUTH. v. Hartsfield (1997)
“The court buttressed its conclusion by noting that prior to 1988, section 196.192(1) read: "All property used exclusively for exempt purposes shall be totally exempt from ad valorem taxation.”
Genesis Ministries, Inc. v. Gregory S. Brown, as Property etc. (2018)
“1st DCA 1992) (“[U]nder the plain language of section 196.192, an ad valorem tax exemption is only permitted when the property in question is both owned and used by the tax-exempt entity.”
The National Center for Construction Education etc. v. Ed Crapo, as Alachua County etc. (2018)
“Appellant argues that because it performs an educational function – a charitable purpose – and because the government spends tax dollars on education, Appellant is entitled to a tax exemption under section 196.”
First Baptist Church of San Antonio v. Bexar County Appraisal Review Board (1992)
“After the United States Supreme Court agreed to review a district court's judgment upholding the exemption, the Florida Legislature fended off the constitutional challenge with prompt action: specifically, by amending the statute to allow an exemption only if the property is…”
Metro. Dade Cty. v. Miami-Dade Cty. Community College Foundation, Inc. (1989)
“" This argument lacks merit because the language of Section 196.192(1), Florida Statutes (1985), provides that property only has to be "used" for an exempt purpose in order to qualify for an exemption.”
Daniel v. TM Murrell Co., Inc. (1984)
“The lower court, basing its ruling upon section 196.192, Florida Statutes (1981) [1] and section 196.”
Robbins v. Mt. Sinai Medical Center, Inc. (1999)
“The trial court made this determination because Lessee: (1) insured the subject properties; (2) maintained the subject properties; (3) repaired the subject properties; (4) used the subject properties to render tax-exempt health care services; (5) was contractually liable for…”
Metropolitan Dade County v. Kapila (In Re Home & Housing of Dade County, Inc.) (1998)
“In 1988, the Debtor applied for and obtained a charitable exemption from the Taxes with respect to the Improved Properties pursuant to Florida Statute §§ 196.192, 196.195 and 196.196. The Debtor subsequently failed to file a new application or statement of oath pursuant to…”
— 196.192(1) — 13 cases
Mastroianni v. Memorial Medical Center (1992)
“The property appraiser relied upon section 196.192, Florida Statutes (1989), for his position that the owner of the property must be an exempt entity for the property to be exempt from taxation.”
LEON CO. EDUC. AUTH. v. Hartsfield (1997)
“The court buttressed its conclusion by noting that prior to 1988, section 196.192(1) read: "All property used exclusively for exempt purposes shall be totally exempt from ad valorem taxation.”
FIRST UNION NAT. BANK OF FLA. v. Ford (1993)
“It held that to be entitled to the tax exemption under section 196.192, a tax exempt entity had to be the owner as well as the user and occupant of the property.”
Genesis Ministries, Inc. v. Gregory S. Brown, as Property etc. (2018)
“1st DCA 1992) (“[U]nder the plain language of section 196.192, an ad valorem tax exemption is only permitted when the property in question is both owned and used by the tax-exempt entity.”
Metro. Dade Cty. v. Miami-Dade Cty. Community College Foundation, Inc. (1989)
“" This argument lacks merit because the language of Section 196.192(1), Florida Statutes (1985), provides that property only has to be "used" for an exempt purpose in order to qualify for an exemption.”
— 196.192(2) — 6 cases
First Baptist Church of San Antonio v. Bexar County Appraisal Review Board (1992)
“After the United States Supreme Court agreed to review a district court's judgment upholding the exemption, the Florida Legislature fended off the constitutional challenge with prompt action: specifically, by amending the statute to allow an exemption only if the property is…”
The National Center for Construction Education etc. v. Ed Crapo, as Alachua County etc. (2018)
“Appellant argues that because it performs an educational function – a charitable purpose – and because the government spends tax dollars on education, Appellant is entitled to a tax exemption under section 196.”
Walden v. Hertz Corporation (1975)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.