O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 48-8-80 (2019)

“Qualified municipality” defined

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this article, the term “qualified municipality” means only those incorporated municipalities which impose a tax other than the tax authorized by this article and which provide at least three of the following services: (1) Water; (2) Sewage; (3) Garbage collection; (4) Police protection; (5) Fire protection; or (6) Library.

History

Ga. L. 1975, p. 984, § 2; Code 1933, § 91A-4601, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p.

309, § 2; Ga. L. 1979, p. 446, § 1; Code 1933, § 91A-4609, enacted by Ga. L. 1979, p. 446, § 2.

Annotations

Law reviews. For survey article on local government law for the period from June 1, 2002, to

May 31, 2003, see 55 Mercer L. Rev. 353 (2003).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. 62 C.J.S., Municipal Corporations, § 1 et seq.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1983–2013 · leading case: City of Winder v. Collins, 385 S.E.2d 71 (Ga. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Winder v. Collins, 385 S.E.2d 71 (Ga. 1989). · cites it 12× “The joint county and municipal sales and use tax, OCGA § 48-8-80 et seq., was enacted to "authorize counties and certain municipalities to levy a local sales and use tax under certain conditions.”
Turner Cnty. v. City of Ashburn, 749 S.E.2d 685 (Ga. 2013). · cites it 4× “This appeal, filed pursuant to our order granting application for discretionary review, is the fourth time in which the constitutionality of what has become known as the Local Option Sales Tax Act, OCGA § 48-8-80 et seq., or a provision of it, has come before this Court.”
City of Roswell v. City of Atlanta, 410 S.E.2d 28 (Ga. 1991). · cites it 2× “The Joint County and Municipal Sales and Use Tax Act, OCGA §§ 48-8-80 to 48-8-91, specifies the date that the commissioner shall implement a certificate on the distribution of tax proceeds.”
City of Decatur v. DeKalb Cnty., 589 S.E.2d 561 (Ga. 2003). · cites it 2× “It dealt with a precursor to this State’s current Local Option Sales Tax (“LOST”) statute, now found at OCGA § 48-8-80 et seq. The statute at issue in Mangelly was not enacted pursuant to the special district provision of the Constitution, which is currently found at Article IX,…”
Nielubowicz v. Chatham Cnty., 312 S.E.2d 802 (Ga. 1984). · cites it 4× “Chatham County uses its proceeds from the local option sales tax, OCGA § 48-8-80 et seq. (Code Ann. 91A-4609 et seq.”
City of Atlanta v. Collins, 417 S.E.2d 141 (Ga. 1992). · cites it 2× “* OCGA § 48-8-80 defines a “qualified municipality” eligible for tax revenue as those *262 incorporated municipalities that impose a tax other than the local option sales tax and provide three of the following services: water, sewage, garbage collection, police protection, fire…”
Collins v. Cw Matthews Contracting Co. Inc., 444 S.E.2d 100 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “The three types of local use taxes at issue are: (1) joint county and municipal sales and use tax (OCGA §§ 48-8-80 — 48-8-95); (2) special county one percent sales and use tax (OCGA §§ 48-8-110 — 48-8-122), and (3) Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) Act of 1965…”
Salem v. Tattnall Cnty., 302 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. 1983). · cites it 2× “In enumeration of error two, the taxpayers seek mandamus requiring that taxes collected under the Joint County and Municipal Sales and Use Tax Act, OCGA § 48-8-80 et seq. (Code Ann. § 91A-4601 et seq.”
C. W. Matthews Contracting Co. v. Collins, 457 S.E.2d 171 (Ga. 1995). · cites it 2× “In this case, however, Matthews does not contend that the assessment was based on work performed for the state, and § 50-17-29 (e) does not apply.”
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.