Fla. Admin. Code R. 34-13.310
(8) Indirect Gifts.
(c) Factors which the Commission will consider in determining whether an indirect gift has been made include but are not limited to:
1. The existence or nonexistence of communications by the donor indicating the donor’s intent to make or convey the gift to the reporting individual or procurement employee rather than to the intervening third person;
2. The existence or nonexistence of any relationship between the donor and the third person, independent of the relationship between the donor and the reporting individual or procurement employee, that would motivate a gift to the third person;
3. The existence or nonexistence of any relationship between the third person and the reporting individual or procurement employee that would motivate the gift.
4. Whether the same or similar gifts have been or are being provided to other persons having the same relationship to the donor as the third person;
5. Whether, under the circumstances, the third person had full and independent decision-making authority to determine whether the reporting individual or procurement employee, or another, would receive the gift;
6. Whether the third person was acting with the knowledge or consent of, or under the direction of, the donor;
7. Whether there were or were intended any payments or bookkeeping transactions between the third person and the donor, reimbursing the third person for the gift; and
8. The degree of ownership or control the donor has over the third person.
(d) The provisions of this subsection may be illustrated by the following examples:
Example 1: A law firm which lobbies the agency of Reporting Individual C (“C”) invites all of its attorneys to attend a weekend retreat. The attorneys are encouraged to bring their spouses or significant others at the firm’s expense. C is married to an attorney in the firm and has been asked by her spouse to attend the retreat. The lodging provided to C for the retreat would be considered a gift to C from her spouse and thus not prohibited, because the firm’s invitation was extended to C’s spouse by virtue of his employment with the firm.
Example 2: Reporting Individual D (“D”) hosts a fox hunt attended by other reporting individuals. Lobbyists who lobby the agency of D give money to a third person, who is not a reporting individual, to pay for the food and beverages which will be served at the fox hunt. D orders and prepares the food and beverages. The money provided to the third person by the lobbyists would be a gift to D, because it was given with the intent of benefiting D and his guests at the fox hunt.
Example 3: A principal which employs 10 lobbyists who lobby the agency of Reporting Individual M (“M”) channels a gift costing $1,000 to M through its 10 lobbyists. Although each lobbyist’s share of the gift is $100, the gift would be prohibited because it is an indirect gift from the principal with a value of excess of $100.
Example 4: Reporting Individual N (“N”) and N’s spouse have arranged to take a vacation trip together. A lobbyist who lobbies N’s agency meets with the spouse and offers to pay for the spouse’s travel expenses, which would exceed $100. The lobbyist and N’s spouse know each other only through the lobbyist’s involvement with N. This would constitute an indirect gift to N, and would be prohibited because its value exceeds $100.
Rulemaking Authority 112.322(9)(b) FS. Law Implemented 112.3148, 112.31485 FS. History–New 4-16-92, Amended 2-27-95, 1-11-16.