Can a Florida county tax property owned by another county that sits within its borders?

Subject

Taxation - Immunity - Counties

Plain-English summary

The Hillsborough County Property Appraiser asked the AG a question that came up because Pinellas County owns real property located inside Hillsborough County: can the county where the property sits tax property owned by a different county?

The AG's answer was no. Florida follows the general rule that the state is immune from taxation and that its agencies and instrumentalities cannot be taxed unless they are specifically made subject to tax. Counties, whether charter or not, are political subdivisions of the state, so they share that immunity. The AG stressed that this immunity does not come from a statute or a particular constitutional clause; it "rests upon broad grounds of fundamentals in government."

The AG pointed to the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Dickinson v. City of Tallahassee, which asked whether a municipality could tax state or county property under section 166.231. The court found nothing in the constitution or the taxing statutes waiving the sovereign's immunity, and held that county property was not subject to ad valorem tax even when it was leased to private, for-profit businesses. Applying the same reasoning, the AG concluded that absent a clear constitutional provision waiving the immunity, property owned by one county and located in another county is immune from taxation by the host county.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2014. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Can one county tax another county's property?
Under this opinion, no. The AG advised that county-owned property is immune from taxation, and that immunity carries over when the property happens to be located within a different county.

Where does county tax immunity come from?
Not from a statute or a single constitutional clause. The AG quoted Florida case law describing the immunity as resting "upon broad grounds of fundamentals in government." Counties get it because they are political subdivisions of the state, which is itself immune.

Does leasing county property to a private business change the answer?
The AG noted that in Dickinson v. City of Tallahassee the Florida Supreme Court held county property was still not subject to ad valorem tax even though it was leased to private, for-profit businesses. Immunity attaches to the public owner, not to how the property is used.

Could the immunity ever be waived?
The AG framed the question in terms of whether the constitution or the taxing statutes contain a clear waiver. Finding none, it treated the property as immune. A waiver would have to be clear.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion distinguishes immunity from exemption. An exemption is a legislative grace that removes otherwise taxable property from the tax rolls; immunity means the property was never within the taxing power in the first place. The AG, citing Park-N-Shop v. Sparkman and State ex rel. Charlotte County v. Alford, explained that state and county property is immune regardless of whether statutes also describe it as exempt.

The controlling authority is Dickinson v. City of Tallahassee. There the Florida Supreme Court considered section 166.231, which lets municipalities impose certain taxes, and Article VII, section 9(a) of the Florida Constitution, which authorizes municipal ad valorem taxes. The court found no evidence either provision was meant to release the sovereign's immunity, so county property remained beyond the reach of the tax. The AG read that holding to control the inter-county situation presented here, citing Canaveral Port Authority v. Department of Revenue and Markham v. Broward County for the proposition that counties, as parts of the state, are immune from taxation by other local taxing units.

Citations

• section 166.231, Florida Statutes
• Article VII, section 9(a), Florida Constitution
• Article VIII, s. 1, Fla. Const.
• Dickinson v. City of Tallahassee, 325 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1975)
• Canaveral Port Authority v. Department of Revenue, 690 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 1996)
• Park-N-Shop, Inc. v. Sparkman, 99 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1957)
• First Union National Bank of Florida v. Ford, 636 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
• Markham v. Broward County, 825 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
• State ex rel. Charlotte County v. Alford, 107 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1958)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.myfloridalegal.com/ag-opinions/taxation-immunity-counties
• Original PDF: https://www.myfloridalegal.com/print/pdf/node/8088

Original opinion text

The Honorable Bob Henriquez

Hillsborough County Property Appraiser

County Center, 16th Floor

601 East Kennedy Boulevard

Tampa, Florida 33602-4932

Attn: Mr. William D. Shepherd, General Counsel

Dear Mr. Henriquez:

You ask for this office’s assistance in determining whether county-owned property located outside that county’s jurisdictional boundaries is immune from taxation by the county in which the property is located.[1]

It is well-settled that property owned by a county is immune from taxation.[2] Florida follows the general rule that the state is immune from taxation and that taxes may not be imposed upon its agencies or instrumentalities unless they are specifically made subject to taxation.[3] Counties, whether charter or not, are political subdivisions of the state and are also immune from taxation.[4] The state's and counties' immunity from taxation, however, is not derived from statute or the constitution, but "rests upon broad grounds of fundamentals in government."[5]

The Supreme Court of Florida in Dickinson v. City of Tallahassee[6] has previously addressed whether property owned by the state or a county could be taxed by a municipality pursuant to section 166.231, Florida Statutes. The Court noted that the crux of the case was whether the state had waived its immunity from taxation by either the State Constitution or the taxing statutes. While Article VII, section 9(a), Florida Constitution, authorizes municipalities to impose ad valorem taxes, the court found no evidence that it was meant to allow taxation of the sovereign or that the power to tax by implication was intended to be a release of the sovereign’s immunity from taxation.[7] Absent a clear waiver of immunity, the court concluded that county property, even though leased to private, for-profit businesses, was not subject to ad valorem taxation.[8]

Accordingly, absent a clear constitutional provision affecting the immunity of county property from taxation, property owned by a county situated in another county is immune from taxation.

Sincerely,

Lagran Saunders

Assistant Attorney General

ALS/tsh

[1] Your question arises due to Pinellas County’s ownership of real property located in Hillsborough County. Mr. Joseph A. Morrissey, Pinellas County Assistant County Attorney, has reviewed this matter and agrees with your conclusion that county-owned property is immune from taxation.

[2] Canaveral Port Authority v. Department of Revenue, 690 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 1996).

[3] See, e.g., Park-N-Shop, Inc. v. Sparkman, 99 So. 2d 571, 573-574 (Fla. 1957) (property of the state and of a county is immune from taxation despite references to such property in statutes as being exempt). See also First Union National Bank of Florida v. Ford, 636 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (counties, as parts of state, are immune from state, municipal, or other special districts' attempts at taxation).

[4] See Markham v. Broward County, 825 So. 2d 472, 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), citing Canaveral Port Authority v. Department of Revenue, 690 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 1996) and Article VIII, s. 1, Fla. Const.

[5] State ex rel. Charlotte County v. Alford, 107 So. 2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1958) (although statutes specifically exempt state owned lands, such exemption is not dependent upon statutory or constitutional provisions, but rests upon broad grounds of fundamentals in government).

[6] 325 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1975).

[7] Id. at 3.

[8] Cf. Op. Att’y Gen. Fla. 06-05 (2006) (county may not alter immunity of county property from taxation absent clear constitutional waiver of such immunity even though county property is leased or used by a private entity).