CopyCited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...ssumption that others in the beer distribution chain are not as keenly motivated as the manufacturer to ensure the freshness of any particular product. [5] 2. Justification as a revenue measure. The collection of excise taxes on malt beverages under Section 563.05, Florida Statutes (1975), is a substantial source of state revenue....
0 red0 yellow9 green0 procedural
Cited as authorityMembreno (2016)phrase: "rule_authority"
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2017 WL 1175880
crash. NHTSA, Event Data Recorders, 49 C.F.R. § 563,5 (2015). Approximately 96% of cars manufactured
0 red1 yellow0 green1 procedural
CopyPublished | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 11 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1312, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 27534
...After liquidation, Great American Bank of Broward County, a secured creditor, filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief wherein it asked the bankruptcy court to rule on whether the proceeds of the liquidation sale of the debtor’s inventory were subject to Florida excise taxes. Florida statute §
563.05 levies an excise tax on manufacturers, distributors and vendors of malt beverages and § 564.-06 imposes an excise tax upon manufacturers and distributors of wine. Under Fla.Stat. §
561.50(1), all excise taxes are collected at the distributor level rather than at the retail level. The bankruptcy court found that the trustee for the debtor was not liable for excise taxes levied pursuant to Fla.Stat. §§
563.05 and
564.06....
...The issue before this court is whether the sales conducted by the trustee in liquidating the debtor’s inventory are subject to Florida excise taxes. A threshold question, not directly addressed by the district court, is whether the sales in question are subject at all to the Florida excise tax. As noted supra, Fla.Stat. §§
563.05 and
564.06 impose excise taxes upon manufacturers, distributors, and vendors of beer and wine....
...Because Florida law forbids the sale of any alcoholic beverages within the state without a license, the district court apparently considered the trustee to be operating under the authority granted to Cusato Brothers by the State of Florida to operate as an alcoholic beverage distributor. We have not been persuaded that §§ 563.05 and 564.04 do not apply to the transactions in question; therefore, we *889 do not dispute the assumption of the district court that the trustee acted as a distributor subject to Florida law in conducting the liquidation sales....
...court shall be subject to all Federal, State and local taxes applicable to such businesses to the same extent as if it were conducted by an individual or corporation. Since we agree that the trustee acted as a distributor for purposes of Fla.Stat. §§
563.05 and
564.06, the question presented becomes whether the trustee was “conducting any business” within the purview of 28 U.S.C....
...uture sales. The district court took note of the highly regulated nature of alcoholic beverage transactions in concluding that, under 28 U.S.C. § 959 (b), the sale of the debtor’s inventory was subject to the excise tax as provided in Fla.Stat. §§
563.05 and
564.06....
...not “conducting any business” within the contemplation of 28 U.S.C. § 960 in liquidating the debtor’s inventory. Thus, we conclude that the bankruptcy court properly held that the estate is not subject to tax liability pursuant to Fla.Stat. §§
563.05 and
564.06....
