192 So. 3d 27
Fla.2016Background
- Panama Commons, a nonprofit limited partnership, built a 92-unit affordable housing project and received a full ad valorem tax exemption for 2012 under §196.1978.
- Panama Commons filed a timely exemption application for the 2013 tax year before the Legislature repealed the exemption for limited partnerships effective retroactively to the 2013 tax roll.
- The Bay County Property Appraiser denied the 2013 exemption after the repeal and Panama Commons sued, claiming the retroactive repeal violated due process by impairing a vested right.
- The trial court granted partial summary judgment for Panama Commons, finding the exemption right vested on January 1, 2013; the First District affirmed that the substantive right vested on January 1.
- The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding Panama Commons’ right had not vested before the Legislature repealed the exemption and that applying the repeal to 2013 did not violate due process.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Panama Commons had a vested right to the §196.1978 exemption for 2013 before the repeal | Panama Commons: right vested Jan 1, 2013; retroactive repeal impairs a vested right | State/Panama Commons appellee: no vested right until application is granted and tax roll certified | No vesting before repeal; applying repeal to 2013 does not violate due process |
| Whether retroactive repeal creates a new obligation or destroys vested rights | Panama Commons: repeal imposed new tax obligation not in effect on Jan 1, violating due process | State: Legislature may change tax exemptions; no vested entitlement existed | Retroactive application permissible because no vested right existed |
| Whether statutory deadlines/procedures (e.g., July 1 denial, certification) create vested rights on Jan 1 | Panama Commons: procedural scheme creates expectation and substantive right as of Jan 1 | State: procedural steps show entitlement contingent until appraisal, certification, and roll finalization | Procedural deadlines do not create a constitutionally protected vested right on Jan 1 |
| Whether precedent supports treating exemption status as determined by law in effect on Jan 1 | Panama Commons: relies on cases recognizing Jan 1 assessment date as determinative | State: cases cited concern actual use/value on Jan 1, not exemption statutes; prior cases allow legislative repeal of exemptions | Court distinguishes precedent and holds it does not require exemption vesting on Jan 1 |
Key Cases Cited
- Maronda Homes, Inc. of Florida v. Lakeview Reserve Homeowners Ass'n, 127 So.3d 1258 (Fla. 2013) (property and due process principles cited regarding rights in property)
- Sebring Airport Auth. v. McIntyre, 642 So.2d 1072 (Fla. 1994) (tax exemptions are strictly construed against claimant)
- Straughn v. Camp, 293 So.2d 689 (Fla. 1974) (one legislature cannot bind successors as to taxing power)
- Daytona Beach Racing & Recreational Facilities Dist. v. Volusia County, 372 So.2d 419 (Fla. 1979) (legislature may repeal prior tax exemption statutes)
- Fla. Hosp. Waterman, Inc. v. Buster, 984 So.2d 478 (Fla. 2008) (two-prong retroactivity/due-process analysis)
- Chase Fed. Hous. Corp. v. Metro. Dade Cty., 737 So.2d 494 (Fla. 1999) (consider statute terms and purpose to determine retroactivity)
- McCord v. Smith, 43 So.2d 704 (Fla. 1949) (retroactive laws invalid when vested rights are destroyed or new obligations imposed)
- Roger Dean Enters., Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 387 So.2d 358 (Fla. 1980) (upholding retroactive tax changes under limited circumstances)
- United States v. Carlton, 512 U.S. 26 (1994) (U.S. Supreme Court permits modest retroactivity of tax statutes)
- Dade Cty. Taxing Auths. v. Cedars of Lebanon Hosp. Corp., 355 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 1978) (decisions focus on actual use of property on Jan 1)
- Page v. City of Fernandina Beach, 714 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (tax status depends on actual physical use on Jan 1)