Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 220.13 - Full Text and Legal Analysis Florida Statute 220.13 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Fla. Stat. § 220.13 (2026) Copy Cite Official Site Syfertize CourtListener Amendments
1220.13 “Adjusted federal income” defined.—
(1) The term “adjusted federal income” means an amount equal to the taxpayer’s taxable income as defined in subsection (2), or such taxable income of more than one taxpayer as provided in s. 220.131, for the taxable year, adjusted as follows:
2(a) Additions.—There shall be added to such taxable income:
1.a. The amount of any tax upon or measured by income, excluding taxes based on gross receipts or revenues, paid or accrued as a liability to the District of Columbia or any state of the United States which is deductible from gross income in the computation of taxable income for the taxable year.
b. Notwithstanding sub-subparagraph a., if a credit taken under s. 220.1875, s. 220.1876, s. 220.1877, or s. 220.1878 is added to taxable income in a previous taxable year under subparagraph 11. and is taken as a deduction for federal tax purposes in the current taxable year, the amount of the deduction allowed shall not be added to taxable income in the current year. The exception in this sub-subparagraph is intended to ensure that the credit under s. 220.1875, s. 220.1876, s. 220.1877, or s. 220.1878 is added in the applicable taxable year and does not result in a duplicate addition in a subsequent year.
2. The amount of interest which is excluded from taxable income under s. 103(a) of the Internal Revenue Code or any other federal law, less the associated expenses disallowed in the computation of taxable income under s. 265 of the Internal Revenue Code or any other law, excluding 60 percent of any amounts included in alternative minimum taxable income, as defined in s. 55(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, if the taxpayer pays tax under s. 220.11(3).
3. In the case of a regulated investment company or real estate investment trust, an amount equal to the excess of the net long-term capital gain for the taxable year over the amount of the capital gain dividends attributable to the taxable year.
4. That portion of the wages or salaries paid or incurred for the taxable year which is equal to the amount of the credit allowable for the taxable year under s. 220.181. This subparagraph shall expire on the date specified in s. 290.016 for the expiration of the Florida Enterprise Zone Act.
5. That portion of the ad valorem school taxes paid or incurred for the taxable year which is equal to the amount of the credit allowable for the taxable year under s. 220.182. This subparagraph shall expire on the date specified in s. 290.016 for the expiration of the Florida Enterprise Zone Act.
6. The amount taken as a credit under s. 220.195 which is deductible from gross income in the computation of taxable income for the taxable year.
7. That portion of assessments to fund a guaranty association incurred for the taxable year which is equal to the amount of the credit allowable for the taxable year.
8. In the case of a nonprofit corporation which holds a pari-mutuel permit and which is exempt from federal income tax as a farmers’ cooperative, an amount equal to the excess of the gross income attributable to the pari-mutuel operations over the attributable expenses for the taxable year.
9. The amount taken as a credit for the taxable year under s. 220.1895.
10. Up to nine percent of the eligible basis of any designated project which is equal to the credit allowable for the taxable year under s. 220.185.
11. Any amount taken as a credit for the taxable year under s. 220.1875, s. 220.1876, s. 220.1877, or s. 220.1878. The addition in this subparagraph is intended to ensure that the same amount is not allowed for the tax purposes of this state as both a deduction from income and a credit against the tax. This addition is not intended to result in adding the same expense back to income more than once.
12. The amount taken as a credit for the taxable year under s. 220.196. The addition in this subparagraph is intended to ensure that the same amount is not allowed for the tax purposes of this state as both a deduction from income and a credit against the tax. The addition is not intended to result in adding the same expense back to income more than once.
13. The amount taken as a credit for the taxable year pursuant to s. 220.198.
14. The amount taken as a credit for the taxable year pursuant to s. 220.1915.
15. The amount taken as a credit for the taxable year pursuant to s. 220.199.
16. The amount taken as a credit for the taxable year pursuant to s. 220.1991.
(b) Subtractions.—
1. There shall be subtracted from such taxable income:
a. The net operating loss deduction allowable for federal income tax purposes under s. 172 of the Internal Revenue Code for the taxable year,
b. The net capital loss allowable for federal income tax purposes under s. 1212 of the Internal Revenue Code for the taxable year,
c. The excess charitable contribution deduction allowable for federal income tax purposes under s. 170(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code for the taxable year, and
d. The excess contributions deductions allowable for federal income tax purposes under s. 404 of the Internal Revenue Code for the taxable year.

However, a net operating loss and a capital loss shall never be carried back as a deduction to a prior taxable year, but all deductions attributable to such losses shall be deemed net operating loss carryovers and capital loss carryovers, respectively, and treated in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same time periods as are prescribed for such carryovers in ss. 172 and 1212, respectively, of the Internal Revenue Code.

2. There shall be subtracted from such taxable income any amount to the extent included therein the following:
a. Dividends treated as received from sources without the United States, as determined under s. 862 of the Internal Revenue Code.
b. All amounts included in taxable income under s. 78, s. 951, or s. 951A of the Internal Revenue Code.

However, any amount subtracted under this subparagraph is allowed only to the extent such amount is not deductible in determining federal taxable income. As to any amount subtracted under this subparagraph, there shall be added to such taxable income all expenses deducted on the taxpayer’s return for the taxable year which are attributable, directly or indirectly, to such subtracted amount. Further, no amount shall be subtracted with respect to dividends paid or deemed paid by a Domestic International Sales Corporation.

3. In computing “adjusted federal income” for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1976, there shall be allowed as a deduction the amount of wages and salaries paid or incurred within this state for the taxable year for which no deduction is allowed pursuant to s. 280C(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (relating to credit for employment of certain new employees).
4. There shall be subtracted from such taxable income any amount of nonbusiness income included therein.
5. There shall be subtracted any amount of taxes of foreign countries allowable as credits for taxable years beginning on or after September 1, 1985, under s. 901 of the Internal Revenue Code to any corporation which derived less than 20 percent of its gross income or loss for its taxable year ended in 1984 from sources within the United States, as described in s. 861(a)(2)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code, not including credits allowed under ss. 902 and 960 of the Internal Revenue Code, withholding taxes on dividends within the meaning of sub-subparagraph 2.a., and withholding taxes on royalties, interest, technical service fees, and capital gains.
6. Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, except with respect to amounts subtracted pursuant to subparagraphs 1. and 3., any increment of any apportionment factor which is directly related to an increment of gross receipts or income which is deducted, subtracted, or otherwise excluded in determining adjusted federal income shall be excluded from both the numerator and denominator of such apportionment factor. Further, all valuations made for apportionment factor purposes shall be made on a basis consistent with the taxpayer’s method of accounting for federal income tax purposes.
(c) Installment sales occurring after October 19, 1980.—
1. In the case of any disposition made after October 19, 1980, the income from an installment sale shall be taken into account for the purposes of this code in the same manner that such income is taken into account for federal income tax purposes.
2. Any taxpayer who regularly sells or otherwise disposes of personal property on the installment plan and reports the income therefrom on the installment method for federal income tax purposes under s. 453(a) of the Internal Revenue Code shall report such income in the same manner under this code.
(d) Nonallowable deductions.—A deduction for net operating losses, net capital losses, or excess contributions deductions under ss. 170(d)(2), 172, 1212, and 404 of the Internal Revenue Code which has been allowed in a prior taxable year for Florida tax purposes shall not be allowed for Florida tax purposes, notwithstanding the fact that such deduction has not been fully utilized for federal tax purposes.
(e) Adjustments related to federal acts.—Taxpayers shall be required to make the adjustments prescribed in this paragraph for Florida tax purposes with respect to certain tax benefits received pursuant to the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008; the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009; the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010; the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010; the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012; the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014; the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016; the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017; and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020.
1.a. There shall be added to such taxable income an amount equal to 100 percent of any amount deducted for federal income tax purposes as bonus depreciation for the taxable year pursuant to ss. 167 and 168(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 103 of Pub. L. No. 110-185; s. 1201 of Pub. L. No. 111-5; s. 2022 of Pub. L. No. 111-240; s. 401 of Pub. L. No. 111-312; s. 331 of Pub. L. No. 112-240; s. 125 of Pub. L. No. 113-295; s. 143 of Division Q of Pub. L. No. 114-113; and s. 13201 of Pub. L. No. 115-97, for property placed in service after December 31, 2007, and before January 1, 2027.
b. For the taxable year and for each of the 6 subsequent taxable years, there shall be subtracted from such taxable income an amount equal to one-seventh of the amount by which taxable income was increased pursuant to this subparagraph, notwithstanding any sale or other disposition of the property that is the subject of the adjustments and regardless of whether such property remains in service in the hands of the taxpayer.
c. The provisions of sub-subparagraph b. do not apply to amounts by which taxable income was increased pursuant to this subparagraph for amounts deducted for federal income tax purposes as bonus depreciation for qualified improvement property as defined in s. 168(e)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 13204 of Pub. L. No. 115-97.
2. There shall be added to such taxable income an amount equal to 100 percent of any amount in excess of $128,000 deducted for federal income tax purposes for the taxable year pursuant to s. 179 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 102 of Pub. L. No. 110-185; s. 1202 of Pub. L. No. 111-5; s. 2021 of Pub. L. No. 111-240; s. 402 of Pub. L. No. 111-312; s. 315 of Pub. L. No. 112-240; and s. 127 of Pub. L. No. 113-295, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007, and before January 1, 2015. For the taxable year and for each of the 6 subsequent taxable years, there shall be subtracted from such taxable income one-seventh of the amount by which taxable income was increased pursuant to this subparagraph, notwithstanding any sale or other disposition of the property that is the subject of the adjustments and regardless of whether such property remains in service in the hands of the taxpayer.
3. There shall be added to such taxable income an amount equal to the amount of deferred income not included in such taxable income pursuant to s. 108(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 1231 of Pub. L. No. 111-5. There shall be subtracted from such taxable income an amount equal to the amount of deferred income included in such taxable income pursuant to s. 108(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 1231 of Pub. L. No. 111-5.
4. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2018, and before January 1, 2021, there shall be added to such taxable income an amount equal to the excess, if any, of:
a. One hundred percent of any amount deducted for federal income tax purposes as business interest expense for the taxable year pursuant to s. 163(j) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 2306 of Pub. L. No. 116-136; over
b. One hundred percent of the amount that would be deductible for federal income tax purposes as business interest expense for the taxable year if calculated pursuant to s. 163(j) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 13301 of Pub. L. No. 115-97.

Any expense added back pursuant to this subparagraph shall be treated as a disallowed business expense carryforward from prior years for the year or years following the addition, until such time as the expense has been used.

5. With respect to qualified improvement property as defined in s. 168(e)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by s. 13204 of Pub. L. No. 115-97, that was placed in service on or after January 1, 2018:
a. There shall be added to such taxable income an amount equal to 100 percent of any amount deducted for federal income tax purposes under s. 167(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. There shall be subtracted an amount equal to the amount of depreciation that would have been deductible pursuant to s. 167(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in effect on January 1, 2020 and without regard to s. 2307 of Pub. L. No. 116-136, notwithstanding any sale or other disposition of the property that is the subject of the adjustments and regardless of whether such property remains in service in the hands of the taxpayer.
b. The department may adopt rules necessary to administer the provisions of this subparagraph, including rules, forms, and guidelines for computing depreciation on qualified improvement property, as defined in s. 168(e)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
6. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020, and before January 1, 2026, the changes made to the Internal Revenue Code by Pub. L. No. 116-260, Division EE, Title I, s. 116 and Title II, s. 210 shall not apply to this chapter. Taxable income under this section shall be calculated as though changes made by those sections were not made to the Internal Revenue Code. The Department of Revenue may adopt rules necessary to administer the provisions of this subparagraph, including rules, forms, and guidelines for treatment of expenses and depreciation related to these changes.
7. Subtractions available under this paragraph may be transferred to the surviving or acquiring entity following a merger or acquisition and used in the same manner and with the same limitations as specified by this paragraph.
8. The additions and subtractions specified in this paragraph are intended to adjust taxable income for Florida tax purposes, and, notwithstanding any other provision of this code, such additions and subtractions shall be permitted to change a taxpayer’s net operating loss for Florida tax purposes.
(2) For purposes of this section, a taxpayer’s taxable income for the taxable year means taxable income as defined in s. 63 of the Internal Revenue Code and properly reportable for federal income tax purposes for the taxable year, but subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (1)(b) with respect to the deductions provided by ss. 172 (relating to net operating losses), 170(d)(2) (relating to excess charitable contributions), 404(a)(1)(D) (relating to excess pension trust contributions), 404(a)(3)(A) and (B) (to the extent relating to excess stock bonus and profit-sharing trust contributions), and 1212 (relating to capital losses) of the Internal Revenue Code, except that, subject to the same limitations, the term:
(a) “Taxable income,” in the case of a life insurance company subject to the tax imposed by s. 801 of the Internal Revenue Code, means life insurance company taxable income; however, for purposes of this code, the total of any amounts subject to tax under s. 815(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code pursuant to s. 801(c) of the Internal Revenue Code shall not exceed, cumulatively, the total of any amounts determined under s. 815(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, from January 1, 1972, to December 31, 1983;
(b) “Taxable income,” in the case of an insurance company subject to the tax imposed by s. 831(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, means taxable investment income;
(c) “Taxable income,” in the case of an insurance company subject to the tax imposed by s. 831(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, means insurance company taxable income;
(d) “Taxable income,” in the case of a regulated investment company subject to the tax imposed by s. 852 of the Internal Revenue Code, means investment company taxable income;
(e) “Taxable income,” in the case of a real estate investment trust subject to the tax imposed by s. 857 of the Internal Revenue Code, means the income subject to tax, computed as provided in s. 857 of the Internal Revenue Code;
(f) “Taxable income,” in the case of a corporation which is a member of an affiliated group of corporations filing a consolidated income tax return for the taxable year for federal income tax purposes, means taxable income of such corporation for federal income tax purposes as if such corporation had filed a separate federal income tax return for the taxable year and each preceding taxable year for which it was a member of an affiliated group, unless a consolidated return for the taxpayer and others is required or elected under s. 220.131;
(g) “Taxable income,” in the case of a cooperative corporation or association, means the taxable income of such organization determined in accordance with the provisions of ss. 1381-1388 of the Internal Revenue Code;
(h) “Taxable income,” in the case of an organization which is exempt from the federal income tax by reason of s. 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, means its unrelated business taxable income as determined under s. 512 of the Internal Revenue Code;
(i) “Taxable income,” in the case of a corporation for which there is in effect for the taxable year an election under s. 1362(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, means the amounts subject to tax under s. 1374 or s. 1375 of the Internal Revenue Code for each taxable year;
(j) “Taxable income,” in the case of a limited liability company, other than a limited liability company classified as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, as defined in and organized pursuant to chapter 605 or qualified to do business in this state as a foreign limited liability company or other than a similar limited liability company classified as a partnership for federal income tax purposes and created as an artificial entity pursuant to the statutes of the United States or any other state, territory, possession, or jurisdiction, if such limited liability company or similar entity is taxable as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, means taxable income determined as if such limited liability company were required to file or had filed a federal corporate income tax return under the Internal Revenue Code;
(k) “Taxable income,” in the case of a taxpayer liable for the alternative minimum tax as defined in s. 55 of the Internal Revenue Code, means the alternative minimum taxable income as defined in s. 55(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, less the exemption amount computed under s. 55(d) of the Internal Revenue Code. A taxpayer is not liable for the alternative minimum tax unless the taxpayer’s federal tax return, or related federal consolidated tax return, if included in a consolidated return for federal tax purposes, reflect a liability on the return filed for the alternative minimum tax as defined in s. 55(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code;
(l) “Taxable income,” in the case of a taxpayer whose taxable income is not otherwise defined in this subsection, means the sum of amounts to which a tax rate specified in s. 11 of the Internal Revenue Code plus the amount to which a tax rate specified in s. 1201(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code are applied for federal income tax purposes.
History.—s. 1, ch. 71-984; ss. 4, 7, ch. 72-278; s. 1, ch. 73-321; s. 6, ch. 74-324; s. 1, ch. 78-230; ss. 4, 6, ch. 80-247; ss. 8, 10, ch. 80-248; s. 5, ch. 82-177; s. 2, ch. 82-232; s. 2, ch. 82-385; s. 5, ch. 82-399; s. 2, ch. 82-410; s. 60, ch. 83-3; s. 13, ch. 83-297; s. 3, ch. 83-349; s. 17, ch. 84-282; s. 38, ch. 84-356; ss. 5, 7, 24, ch. 84-549; s. 17, ch. 86-121; s. 14, ch. 87-99; s. 15, ch. 90-203; s. 18, ch. 93-233; s. 50, ch. 94-136; s. 70, ch. 94-353; s. 4, ch. 97-50; s. 10, ch. 98-101; s. 18, ch. 99-378; s. 7, ch. 2001-225; s. 5, ch. 2006-113; s. 14, ch. 2006-230; s. 2, ch. 2008-206; s, 2, ch. 2009-18; s. 3, ch. 2009-50; s. 2, ch. 2009-192; s. 6, ch. 2010-24; s. 12, ch. 2010-147; ss. 7, 8, ch. 2011-76; s. 2, ch. 2011-229; s. 2, ch. 2013-46; s. 2, ch. 2015-35; s. 17, ch. 2015-148; s. 14, ch. 2016-220; s. 6, ch. 2018-6; s. 2, ch. 2018-119; s. 3, ch. 2019-168; s. 42, ch. 2020-2; s. 30, ch. 2021-31; s. 5, ch. 2021-193; s. 3, ch. 2021-242; s. 28, ch. 2022-97; s. 18, ch. 2023-17; s. 30, ch. 2023-157; s. 22, ch. 2023-173; s. 18, ch. 2025-5.
1Note.—

A. Section 5, ch. 2008-206, provides that “[t]he Department of Revenue may adopt rules necessary to administer the provisions of this act, including rules, forms, and guidelines for computing, claiming, and adding back bonus depreciation under s. 168(k) and deductions under s. 179 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.”

B. Section 3, ch. 2009-192, provides that “[t]he Department of Revenue may adopt rules necessary to administer the provisions of this act.”

2Note.—

A. Section 12, ch. 2021-193, provides that “[t]he Department of Revenue is authorized, and all conditions are deemed met, to adopt emergency rules under s. 120.54(4), Florida Statutes, for the purpose of implementing provisions related to the New Worlds Reading Initiative Tax Credit created by this act. Notwithstanding any other law, emergency rules adopted under this section are effective for 6 months after adoption and may be renewed during the pendency of procedures to adopt permanent rules addressing the subject of the emergency rules.”

B. Section 41, ch. 2022-97, provides that “[t]he Department of Revenue is authorized, and all conditions are deemed met, to adopt emergency rules under s. 120.54(4), Florida Statutes, for the purpose of implementing changes related to the Strong Families tax credit program and the New Worlds Reading Initiative tax credit program made by this act. Notwithstanding any other law, emergency rules adopted under this section are effective for 6 months after adoption and may be renewed during the pendency of procedures to adopt permanent rules addressing the subject of the emergency rules.”

C. Section 43, ch. 2023-17, provides:

“(1) The Department of Revenue is authorized, and all conditions are deemed met, to adopt emergency rules under s. 120.54(4), Florida Statutes, for the purpose of implementing provisions related to the Live Local Program created by this act. Notwithstanding any other law, emergency rules adopted under this section are effective for 6 months after adoption and may be renewed during the pendency of procedures to adopt permanent rules addressing the subject of the emergency rules.

“(2) This section expires July 1, 2026.”

Cases Citing F.S. 220.13

Fla. Stat. § 220.13 (2026) Copy Cite Official Site Syfertize CourtListener Amendments
16 resultsSort: Relevance · Newest · Treatment
Copy

·SRG CORP. v. Dep't of Revenue, 365 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 1978).

Cited 36 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1978 Fla. LEXIS 5091

...[6] The conceded gain represents the amount by which the 1975 sale price exceeds the cash investment in the new property. [7] § 220.02(4)(c), Fla. Stat. (1975). [8] § 220.42(1), Fla. Stat. (1975). [9] §§ 220.02(3) and 220.11-.13, Fla. Stat. (1975) (the latter defining the amount taxed as "adjusted federal income"). [10] § 220.13(2), Fla. Stat. (1975). There are exceptions, but none is relevant here. [11] See, for example, § 220.13(1)(c), Fla....
...in 1975, and that under the Florida Code there was "realization" at that time. It is not contended the new property was sold so as to trigger "realization" before the effective date of the Florida Code. [19] See England, note 3 above, at 17-19. [20] § 220.13(1)(c)4, Fla....
0 red0 yellow4 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2015)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (2000)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (1984)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

·Roger Dean Enter. v. STATE, ETC., 387 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 1980).

Cited 12 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida

...We conclude that the Legislature intended the new Corporate Income Tax to apply to installment payments received by the taxpayer after January 1, 1972, but produced as a result of a transaction prior to January 1, 1972; otherwise, the Legislature would not have enacted Section 220.13(1)(c). We do not believe the explanation of legislative intent contained in Section 220.02(4) conflicts with Section 220.13(1)(c), but if it does, the latter section being located later in the statutory scheme and being more specific, would control....
...The taxpayer finds some relief in Thorpe v. Mahin, 43 Ill.2d 36, 250 N.E.2d 633 (1969). This case seemed to turn on an ambiguity in the statute necessitating a construction in favor of the taxpayer. Nevertheless, we do not follow its line of reasoning. The result reached by applying section 220.13(1)(c), Florida Statutes (1973), to the taxpayer's 1972 and 1973 installment receipts from its 1971 sale in no way infringes upon the federal due process of law requirement....
0 red1 yellow11 green0 procedural
Cited "but see"(citing case) (2004)
phrase: "but see"
Cited as authority(citing case) (2016)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (2016)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

Barnett Banks, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 738 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).

Cited 9 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10633, 1999 WL 594267

...Under Florida's Income Tax Code ("FITC"), the amount of state corporate income tax due from a corporation for a given year is based on the amount of taxable income that corporation had for federal income tax purposes for that year. See §§ 220.11, 220.12, & 220.13, Fla....
...Richter, 671 So.2d 149, 153-154 (Fla.1996) (internal quotations omitted). The Department's interpretation of these statutes to support the assessment of interest in this case also impermissibly relies on a reading of the statutes in pari materia with section 220.13(2), Florida Statutes, which merely defines taxable *505 income for purposes of the FITC. Sections 220.809 and 220.31(1), Florida Statutes, specifically cover the question at issue in this case. While section 220.13(2), Florida Statutes, could arguably be read to have some bearing on when a tax is due for purposes of assessing interest absent a more specific statement to the contrary in the FITC, it is a basic tenet of statutory construction that...
Copy

·Dept. of Rev. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 431 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

Cited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal

...h corporation had filed a separate federal income tax return for the taxable year and each preceding taxable year for which it was a member of an affiliated group, unless a consolidated return for the taxpayer and others is required or elected under § 220.131; ... Section 220.13(2), Florida Statutes (Supp....
...plain meaning of its terms." State v. Egan, 287 So.2d 1, 4 (Fla. 1973). See also Caloosa Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners, 429 So.2d 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Although the plain meaning of sections 220.13(2) and 220.03(1)(a) compels a reversal of the Department's order assessing deficiencies against AT & T, we find it necessary to address the Department's remaining arguments....
...ference to the IRC's definition in section 1504(a), there should be no question that AT & T and similar corporations are entitled to the same treatment of dividend income in Florida. The Department, however, asserts in its final order that [s]ection 220.131, Florida Statutes, contains a Florida departure from the federal concepts of "includible corporations" and "affiliated groups," such that a subsidiary which is not subject to tax under the Florida Code is not a Florida "includible corporation...
...Corporate Income Tax Legislation, at 2-11a through 2-12 (November 3, 1971) [hereinafter: Report ]. The proposed draft, which would have thus deviated from the federal treatment of dividend income, excluded from the definition of "taxable income" in section 220.13(2) those "......
...mination of the above language. Report, supra at 2-18, Amendment No. 3. That the legislature chose to adopt the federal treatment of dividend income is evidenced by the absence of any limitations relating to such *1030 income in the final version of section 220.13(2). [4] Finally, we find the Department's reliance on Florida's alleged departure from the federal concept of "affiliated group" in Section 220.131, Florida Statutes (1973), to be misplaced....
...h subject to and exempt from Florida taxation, is one of the four mandatory deviations from federal tax concepts embodied in the Florida code, [6] we do not find that deviation controlling in this case. See Corporate Income Taxation, supra at 12-13. Section 220.131 applies only to those corporations which either elect or are required by the Department to file consolidated returns in Florida. Because AT & T elected instead to file a separate return in Florida, and the Department did not choose to require the filing of a consolidated return, the provisions of section 220.131 are simply not applicable and may not be used circuitously to support the Department's otherwise tenuous position....
...and capital losses, capital transactions, small businesses and foreign source income. That the Florida treatment of dividend income thus does not deviate from the federal scheme is readily apparent. See Corporate Income Taxation, supra at 11-23. [5] Section 220.131, Florida Statutes (1973), provides, in relevant part, that (1) Subject to subsection (5), any corporation subject to tax under this code which is the parent company of an affiliated group of corporations may elect ......
...The Department urges that we apply that definition, instead of the statutory definition of affiliated groups found in section 220.03(1)(a), in this case. We decline to do so for two reasons: First, AT & T did not elect to file a consolidated return pursuant to section 220.131 and we therefore see no reason to apply the provisions of that section to the facts of this case....
0 red0 yellow2 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2024)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (1985)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

·Dept. of Revenue v. First Union Nat. Bk., 513 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 1987).

Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 489, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 2717

...(2) The tax imposed by this section shall be an amount equal to 5 1/2 percent of the franchise tax base of the bank or savings association for the taxable year... . (3) For purposes of this part, the franchise tax base shall be adjusted federal income, as defined in s. 220.13, apportioned to this state, plus nonbusiness income allocated to this state pursuant to s....
...Florida's tax mandates the inclusion of all interest earned on federal, state and local debt obligations in the tax base for purposes of measuring the tax. Federal obligations are included in the tax base by section 220.63(3), which adopts the definition of "adjusted federal income" codified in section 220.13, Florida Statutes (1985). State and local obligations are included in the tax base by section 220.13(1)(a)2, Florida Statutes (1985), which requires the addition or inclusion of all interest which is "excluded from taxable income under s....
...Consistent with the statutory purpose, rule 12C-1.013(1)(a)2., Florida Administrative Code, provides as follows: Pursuant to legislation enacted during the 1972 regular session of the legislature and retroactive to January 1, 1972, taxable income as defined in Code Section 220.13(2) shall be adjusted under Code section 220.13(1)(a)2....
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityBetts (2006)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

Heftler Constr. Co. & Sub. v. Depart. of Rev., 334 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).

Cited 7 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal

...nd July 31, 1975. In determining this issue, three further issues present themselves for decision: "A. Do profits or losses derived by a corporate income taxpayer from operations in Puerto Rico come within the foreign source income exclusion of F.S. § 220.13(1)(b)2.b.? "B. If so, is the foreign source income adjustment of § 220.13 applicable to an affiliated group filing a consolidated return under F.S. § 220.131? "C....
...Are property, payroll and sales of a taxpayer's Puerto Rican operations to be excluded from the demoninator [sic] in its apportionment formula? "It is the petitioners' contention that income or losses from operations within Puerto Rico do not fall within the foreign source income adjustment of F.S. § 220.13. In that alternative, even if they did, petitioners contend that such adjustments required by § 220.13 are not applicable to an affiliated group of corporations filing a consolidated return under § 220.131, which mandates the use of federal taxable income. "It is the respondent's contention that the adjustments required by § 220.13 are applicable to an affiliated group of corporations filing a consolidated return under § 220.131 and that losses derived from Puerto Rican operations are not includable in adjusted federal taxable income for Florida purposes....
...For the fiscal years ending July 31, 1972, and July 31, 1973, petitioners timely filed with the respondent consolidated income tax returns including therein the operations of the Puerto Rico corporations. "5. After a timely audit, the respondent excluded, for the purposes of computing adjusted federal income as defined by § 220.13, the losses sustained by the Puerto Rico corporations....
...The respondent also excluded from the computation of the apportionment factors defined in F.S. § 214.71 and 220.15 the value of the property, payroll and sales utilized in the operations of the Puerto *131 Rico corporations. The respondent cited F.S. §§ 220.13(1)(b)2.b, 220.15(3) and 214.71 as its authority....
...§ 220.15, less the annual exemption allowed by § 220.14. F.S. § 220.12(1). Thus, `adjusted federal income' is the beginning point for computing tax liability under the Florida Code. "There are two sections of Ch. 220 pertaining to adjusted federal income. The first is § 220.13 which defines it as federal taxable income, subject to certain limitations on loss and expense carryovers, adjusted in accordance with specified additions and subtractions. The second is § 220.131 which allows an affiliated group of corporations to file a consolidated return....
...shall be made in the same manner and under the same procedures ... as are required for consolidating the incomes of affiliated corporations for the taxable year for federal income tax purposes ..., and the amount shown as consolidated taxable income shall be the amount subject to tax under this Code.' F.S. § 220.131(4). Based upon this language, it is petitioners' contention, inter alia, that the adjusted federal income definition of § 220.13 is not applicable to affiliated groups filing consolidated returns, whose tax for Florida purposes would be identical to the federal tax. A reading and consideration of these two statutes leads the undersigned to conclude that petitioners' contention in this regard is without merit. "First, there would appear to be no rational reason why the adjustments prescribed by F.S. § 220.13 (which defines `adjusted federal income' for the purposes of determining a taxpayer's net income) would be applicable to one corporation, but would not be applicable to two or more corporations filing as an affiliated group. Second, it must be remembered that the tax imposed by Ch. 220 is a tax measured by net income. Net income is defined in terms of adjusted federal income. The opening sentence of § 220.13, defining adjusted federal income, provides that it means an `amount equal to the taxpayer's taxable income ... or said taxable income of more than one taxpayer as provided in § 220.131, adjusted...' by certain additions and subtractions....
...s and a Florida parent and all of its federal corporate affiliates may elect under certain conditions to file their federal consolidated return in Florida, the net income subject to the Florida income tax is the adjusted federal income as defined by § 220.13. Also see F.A.C. Rule 12C-1.131(4)(c), which provides that `The limitations described in Section 220.13(1)(b) in respect to net capital losses and excess contributions deductions shall be taken into account in the computation of consolidated items.' *132 "This then brings us to the issue of whether profits or losses derived from operations in Puerto Rico come within what is known as the foreign source income exclusion or subtraction of § 220.13(1)(b)2.b....
...losses as foreign source income and losses to be subtracted from adjusted federal income. "In conclusion, it is my interpretation of the statutes in question that affiliated groups are subject to the adjustments to taxable income prescribed by F.S. § 220.13; that profit or losses derived from operations in Puerto Rico come within the foreign source exclusion or subtraction of F.S. 220.13(1)(b)2.b.; and that property, payroll and sales from Puerto Rican operations are to be excluded from the demoninator [sic] of corporations apportioning their income between Florida and other jurisdictions....
Copy

·HEFTLER CONST. CO. v. Florida Dept. of Revenue, 438 So. 2d 139 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).

Cited 4 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24309

...asset and did not realize any gain or loss until the asset was conveyed in 1975, subsequent to the effective date of the Code. The conveyance of the asset was, therefore, a taxable event for the purpose of the Florida income tax. II Loss Carryovers Section 220.13(1)(b)2.b., Florida Statutes (1975), provides that income derived from sales outside the United States or from sources outside the United States on interest, royalties or compensation for services shall be subtracted from taxable income. Section 220.13(1)(b)1.c., Florida Statutes (1975), provides that net operating losses shall be deemed net operating loss carryovers "and treated in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same time periods as are prescribed for such carryovers in" section 172 of the Internal Revenue Code (1975)....
0 red0 yellow1 green1 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2008)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Review denied(citing case) (1986)
phrase: "review denied"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

·Bernard Egan & Co. v. State, Dept. of Rev., 769 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2000 WL 1154038

...ceived by the parent company from its domestic subsidiaries but including dividends from its foreign subsidiaries. See 26 U.S.C.A. § 243 (1988 & West Supp.2000). Egan argues that the statutory provision in effect during the relevant taxing periods, section 220.13(1)(b)2.b., Florida Statutes (1991), violates the Foreign Commerce Clause [1] because the statute, by "piggybacking" on the federal tax code, treats domestic subsidiaries more favorably than foreign subsidiaries....
...GROSS, J., and BAILEY, JENNIFER D., Associate Judge, concur. NOTES [1] "The Congress shall have Power ... [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes[.]" U.S. CONST. art. I, § 8, cl. 3. [2] For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 1993, section 220.13(1)(b)2.b....
0 red0 yellow2 green1 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2008)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cited as authority(citing case) (2006)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Cert. denied(citing case) (2008)
phrase: "cert. denied"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

·Roger Dean Enter., Inc. v. Dep't of Rev., 371 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).

Cited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal

...[6] We conclude that the Legislature intended the new Corporate Income Tax to apply to installment payments received by the taxpayer after January 1, 1972, [7] but produced as a result of a transaction prior to January 1, 1972; otherwise, the Legislature would not have enacted Section 220.13(1)(c). *105 We do not believe the explanation of legislative intent contained in Section 220.02(4) conflicts with Section 220.13(1)(c), but if it does, the latter section being located later in the statutory scheme and being more specific, would control....
...1971. [3] Section 220.12(1), Florida Statutes (1973). [4] Sections 220.15 and 214.71, Florida Statutes (1973). [5] England, "Florida Corporate Income Taxation — Background, Scope and Analysis," Florida State University Law Review (1972), p. 13. [6] Section 220.13(1)(c) (1973); England, "Florida Corporate Income Taxation — Background, Scope and Analysis," Florida State University Law Review, pp....
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (1980)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

Golden West Fin. Corp. v. Florida Dep't of Revenue, 975 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).

Cited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 2129, 2008 WL 420039

...ncome tax return. During that same period, affiliated corporations having no nexus with Florida did not file a Florida income tax return. From 1993 through 1999, appellants filed Florida consolidated tax returns for the affiliated group, pursuant to section 220.131, Florida Statutes, although not all of the corporations were Florida nexus corporations....
...rom the separate Florida returns filed earlier by nexus members of the affiliated group, and then applying those net operating losses against the group’s consolidated Florida income for the tax years 1996 through 1999, as generally contemplated by section 220.13(1)(b)1a, Florida Statutes, which provides that “[tjhere shall be subtracted from ......
...England, Corporate Income Taxation in Florida: Background, Scope, and Analysis, Symposium, Fla. St. L.Rev. 4, 10 (1972)). This approach of “piggybacking” on federal tax code provisions is evident in two provisions of the Florida tax code that apply to appellants’ situation. Section 220.131(4) reads: The computation of consolidated taxable income for the members of an affiliated group of corporations subject to tax hereunder shall be made in the same manner and under the same procedures, including all intercompany adjust...
...incomes of affiliated corporations for the taxable year for federal income tax purposes in accordance with s. 1502 of the Internal Revenue Code, and the amount shown as consolidated taxable income shall be the amount subject to tax under this code. Section 220.13(1)(b)1 states that “[t]he net operating loss deduction allowable for federal income tax purposes under s....
...the specific provisions of law [purportedly] implemented” in violation of- section 120.52(8)(c), Florida Statutes. As noted above, two of the specific provisions of law identified as intended to be implemented by the Florida SRLY rule are sections 220.131(4) and 220.13(1)(b)1, Florida Statutes....
Copy

·Dep't of Revenue v. Seaboard Coastline R.R., 480 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2761, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 6081

...In other words, the legislative intent is to harmonize the Florida scheme of taxation with the federal blueprint. This intent is evident in the later, more specific sections of the code which require the taxpayer to begin its computation of its Florida tax with the amount of its properly reportable federal taxable income. Section 220.13(2), Florida Statutes....
...Rather than harmonizing the two taxing models, this procedure drives them apart. SCL argues that Section 220.02(3), Florida Statutes, authorizes any deduction which can be related to a “federal concept,” and maintains that these subtractions are in addition to those authorized by Section 220.13(1), Florida Statutes....
...Of course, the taxpayer did not take the deduction on its federal return a second time in 1972, but it did take the deduction on its Florida return. The court permitted the deduction, not in reliance upon Section 220.02(3), Florida Statutes, which is not mentioned in the opinion, but on the authority of Sections 220.13(1) and (2), Florida Statutes, which require that the calculation of the Florida tax begin with the amount of federal income that is “properly reportable” for the tax year....
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (1988)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

·Colgate-Palmolive Co. v. Florida Dep't of Revenue, 988 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).

Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 15295, 2008 WL 3850294

...Corporations doing business in Florida are subject to both a federal corporate income tax and a Florida corporate income tax. If a corporation chooses the federal deduction method, Florida uses the federal taxable income as its starting point and treats carryover losses in a similar fashion to the federal system. See § 220.13, Fla. Stat. (2004). Section 220.13(1), Florida Statutes (2004), discusses subtractions to the calculated corporate income and states, in pertinent part: (b) Subtractions.— 1....
...lorida income tax by using the foreign tax credit. Unlike Rhode Island, Florida chooses to tax only its share of a corporation’s business dealings in the United States (expressly leaving foreign source income out of the taxation scheme pursuant to section 220.13(l)(b)2.a., Florida Statutes). Further, when taking the tax credit, appellant’s taxable Florida income is statutorily reduced by the “grossed up” amount of that credit pursuant to section 220.13(l)(b)2.b., Florida Statutes....
...Such an extension is not well reasoned in light of a corporation’s ability in Florida to (1) carryover all losses resulting from the foreign tax deduction and foreign dividend deduction options and (2) subtract all foreign source dividends pursuant to sections 862 and 78 of the I.R.C. § 220.13(1), Fla....
...If a corporation is concerned about offsetting future Florida tax burdens, the corporation can consider Florida’s prohibition on foreign tax credit carryovers alongside all available foreign dividend deduction carryovers pursuant to section 245 of the I.R.C. and section 220.13(l)(b)2.b., Florida Statutes, in rendering either the foreign tax credit or the foreign tax deduction a better option at that time....
...tes the Foreign Commerce Clause. In Emerson, the Ohio Supreme Court invalidated a state statute based on the Foreign Commerce Clause because the statute only allowed a foreign dividends deduction of 85%. Id. at 446. However, unlike the Ohio statute, section 220.13(l)(b)l.a., Florida Statutes, allows a 100% deduction of foreign dividends as well as any foreign dividend credits; it merely limits the carryover of any foreign dividend credits....
...able dollars. Florida subtracts these "gross-up” dividends from its income calculation with all other foreign-source income. . The Department relies heavily on the holding in Heftier Construction, 438 So.2d at 141 , which considered a challenge to section 220.13(l)(b)’s prohibition of foreign source subtraction carryovers and stated in pertinent part: Section 220.13(l)(b)2.b., Florida Statutes (1975), provides that income derived from sales outside the United States or from sources outside the United States on interest, royalties or compensation for services shall be subtracted from taxable income. Section 220.13(l)(b)l.c., Florida Statutes (1975), provides that net operating losses shall be deemed net operating loss carryovers “and treated in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same time periods as are prescribed for such carryovers in” section 172 of the Internal Revenue Code (1975)....
...provided for in section 172 of the Internal Revenue Code would preclude for Florida tax purposes the carryover of a net operating "loss” result *1217 ing from the subtraction of foreign source income. The Department asserts this court must uphold section 220.13(l)(b)l....
...as constitutional because the holding of Heftier Construction was not overrruled by the United States Supreme Court's holding in Kraft . However, this argument fails to consider the underlying argument in Heftier Construction. In Heftier Construction, 438 So.2d at 140 , the Supreme Court was not asked to consider whether section 220.13(l)(b)l. violated the Foreign Commerce Clause by unlawfully discriminating between foreign and domestic dividend credits; the court was merely asked to determine whether section 220.13(l)(b)l....
0 red0 yellow1 green0 procedural
Cited as authority(citing case) (2015)
phrase: "rule_authority"
Open case for full Syfertize analysis →
Copy

Buchwald Enter., Inc. v. Florida Dep't of Revenue, 375 So. 2d 861 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979).

Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15862

14.” In defining “adjusted federal income” Section 220.13 specified: “(1) ‘Adjusted federal income’ shall
Copy

World Fuel Servs. Corp. v. Florida Dep't of Revenue, 23 So. 3d 1293 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).

Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 31, 2010 WL 21089

...Pearl, New York, for appellant. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Charles Catanzaro, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before COPE, CORTIÑAS and ROTHENBERG, JJ. COPE, J. This is an appeal of a summary judgment in which the trial court ruled that paragraph 220.13(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2000), is constitutional....
...ri. The relevant portion of the appendix is in the record of the present case. Under the heading "States that Exclude All Dividends," the appendix lists fifteen states, and their corporate income tax statutes. This listing includes Florida and cites section 220.13, Florida Statutes (1991), which is the provision of Florida's corporate income tax at issue here....
Copy

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Florida Dep't of Revenue (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).

Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal

...(defining “taxpayer” in terms limited to a corporation). 1 “Net income” is based off the corporation’s “adjusted federal income.” § 220.12, Fla. Stat. The terminology used by the Legislature to direct the calculation of “adjusted federal income” is at the heart of this appeal. See § 220.13, Fla....
...According to the department, State Farm did not correctly calculate its income subject to Florida’s corporate income tax: It failed to include in its adjusted federal income the full amount of tax-exempt interest earned from state and local bonds, as required by section 220.13(1)(a)2., Florida Statutes. State Farm paid the assessed amount and interest under protest to avoid interest continuing to accrue....
...It then sued in circuit court to contest the legality of that assessment in full. See § 72.011(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2018). (authorizing taxpayer suit in circuit court to “contest the legality of any assessment or denial of refund of tax, fee, surcharge, permit, interest or penalty”). Under section 220.13, an insurance company’s “adjusted federal income” is its “insurance company taxable income” that is subject to tax under IRC § 831(a), 2 adjusted by adding and subtracting specified items. § 220.13(1), (2)(c), Fla....
...n unless otherwise indicated. 2 “IRC” refers to the Internal Revenue Code, found at title 26 of the United States Code. 2 income under s. 103(a) of the Internal Revenue Code or any other federal law.” § 220.13(1)(a)2., Fla....
...Underwriting income is the insurance company’s earned premiums minus “losses incurred and expenses incurred.” Id. (3). The dispute between State Farm and the department centers on the scope of the application of this provision addressing “losses incurred” vis-à-vis section 220.13(1)(a)2., Florida Statutes. The department premised its assessment on reading the latter provision to require an add-back of all tax-exempt, state-and-local- bond interest income deductible under the former provision. In other words, the department reads “excluded” in section 220.13(1)(a)2....
...rendered judgment in its favor and against State Farm. State Farm takes the same legal position on appeal and argues for reversal. We disagree with State Farm and affirm. The circuit court’s judgment was based purely on an interpretation of section 220.13(1)(a)2., which we review here de novo....
...ed by the Legislature: A term used in chapter 220 has “the same meaning as when used in a comparable context in the Internal Revenue Code and other statutes of the United States relating to federal income taxes.” § 220.03(2)(b), (c), Fla. Stat. Section 220.13(1)(a)2....
...ist of non-excluded items, and not to the effect some other calculation might have on that sum to reduce it. This use of “excluded from” gets us most of the way home, but not quite. The object of the preposition “from” as it is used in section 220.13(1)(a)2. is “taxable income” rather than “gross income.” In section 220.13, “taxable income” refers to “insurance company taxable income” when looking at “an insurance company subject to the tax imposed by s....
...IRC § 832(a). In this context, then, calculating “taxable income” involves subtracting specified items from the sum constituting gross income, which is similar to omitting items from those being summed to calculate gross income. In turn, the reference in section 220.13(1)(a)2....
...separate omission by deduction of the interest amount from the taxable income total. The interest deduction stands on its own, and the total amount of that interest calculated as the deduction under IRC section 832(c)(7) is the amount excluded from taxable income for the purpose of section 220.13(1)(a)2., regardless of whether the same total amount of interest is used in some other calculation. To be sure, the analysis would be different had the Legislature specified that the “excluded” amount to be added back to taxable income under section 220.13(1)(a)2....
...t included in the formula that serves either to “reduce” the losses-incurred deduction or to “reduce federal taxable income for the taxable year.” Indeed, the Legislature has used these quoted terms in its description of other adjustments in section 220.13(1), meaning the Legislature knows how to use these terms for specificity where appropriate....
...CIT. The department, then, lawfully assessed State Farm for the fifteen percent of the state-and-local-bond interest utilized in its “losses incurred” calculation that it subtracted from the add-back of “excluded” interest required under section 220.13(1)(a)2. The circuit court’s reading of section 220.13(1)(a)2....
Copy

State of Florida Dep't of Revenue v. Verizon Commc'ns Inc. & Affiliates, foreign corporations (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).

Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal

...Layne Smith, Judge. February 28, 2024 OSTERHAUS, C.J. The Florida Department of Revenue appeals the circuit court’s entry of partial summary judgment in favor of Appellee Verizon Communications Inc. The Department argues that the circuit court erred in its interpretation of section 220.13(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes, affecting the calculation of certain income tax deductions in Verizon’s favor....
...Stat. Sometimes, a company incurs more losses in a given year than its operating income. These losses are known as net operating losses (NOLs). 1 These operating losses (whether federal or Florida specific) may be used to lower the amount of tax owed on certain years’ tax returns. See 26 U.S.C. § 172; § 220.13(1)(b)1.a., Fla....
...The Department rejected Verizon’s request to utilize the same deduction limit as the federal amount for state tax purposes in favor of a Department-created methodology for calculating NOL deduction limits. Verizon filed a complaint in circuit court on the issue. It contended that the proper reading of section 220.13(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes, is that the Florida NOL limitation is the equivalent amount of the federal NOL limitation....
...LLC, 275 So. 3d 836, 838 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)). This court also reviews de novo an administrative agency’s interpretation of a statute. Art. V, § 21, Fla. Const. 3 The parties dispute the interpretation of § 220.13(1)(b)1....
...deductions attributable to such losses shall be deemed net operating loss carryovers . . . and treated in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same time periods as are prescribed for such carryovers in ss. 172 . . . of the Internal Revenue Code. § 220.13(1)(b)1., Fla....
...bear on the meaning of a disputed text.” Conage v. United States, 346 So. 3d 594, 598 (Fla. 2022) (quoting Alachua Cnty. v. Watson, 333 So. 3d 162, 169 (Fla. 2022)). Verizon’s argument relies upon a straight-forward reading of the statute and we agree with it. Section 220.13(1)(b)1....
...And so, both the statute’s text and the rule support the circuit court’s conclusion that the annual NOL deduction limit amount for state tax purposes is the same amount as under federal law. Conversely, we decline the Department’s invitation to accept its more attenuated interpretation of § 220.13(1)(b)1....
...And given the twenty-year legal limit on carryovers, Verizon wouldn’t come close to receiving the full 5 argument with the statutory language requiring that NOL carryovers be “treated in the same manner, to the same extent, and for the same time periods.” § 220.13(1)(b)1., Fla....

This Florida statute resource is curated by the lawyer who curates this resource, a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.