The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)
|
||||||
|
. . . were engaged in a complicated pyramiding of taxation which was contrary to the dictates of section 212.081 . . .
. . . Section 212.081, Florida Statutes provides an expression of legislative intent with respect to the tax . . .
. . . Subsection 212.081(l)(a)2 specifically exempts from taxation those portions of the property “used exclusively . . .
. . . See Sec. 212.12(12), Fla.Stat. (1981); Sec. 212.081(3), Fla.Stat. (1981). . . .
. . . The legislative intent in Chapter 212 is thus expressed in Sec. 212.081, subdivision (3) (a): “It is . . .
. . . required for the improvement and good government of the city . . . ” (emphasis supplied) and Fla.Stat. 212.081 . . .
. . . a “sales” tax which it suggests is prohibited by the second general statute which it sets forth, § 212.081 . . . It must be held to have been in contemplation of the legislature in its passage of later § 212.081(3) . . . other tax imposed — was already there in 1954 and when the state taxing statute here was enacted, § 212.081 . . . terms of the very statute by which it is struck down as a prohibited “sales” tax under Fla.Stat. § 212.081 . . . The proviso of this general law, Fla.Stat. § 212.081(3) (b), meets the very test which the majority sets . . . . § 212.081(3) (b), F.S.A. . . . , Laws of Florida (1961), the power of the City of Tampa to levy taxes is controlled by Fla.Stat. § 212.081 . . . Fla.Stat. § 212.081, F.S.A. prohibits the cities from imposing a sales tax, and § 167.43 is no authority . . . Tampa Ordinance in question having been enacted before July 11, 1957, was “grandfathered” under Section 212.081 . . .
. . . . § 212.081, F.S.A. precludes the imposition of a sales tax by a municipality. § 212.081(3) provides . . . under which a municipal tax was being levied and collected was not impaired by the enactment of F.S. § 212.081 . . . We hold that the tax imposed by the City of Tampa, being a sales tax, is viola-tive of F.S. § 212.081 . . .
. . . the time Plaintiff paid the questioned tax, but said Ordinance was in direct conflict with Section 212.081 . . .
. . . He says this is expressly stated in Sec. 212.081(1) F.S.1957, F.S.A., and therefore that the amendment . . . with the statement of the Legislature that the amendments were made to raise additional revenue, Sec. 212.081 . . . It is true that the 1957 Legislature in Sec. 212.081(2) stated that the amendment was also made for the . . .