Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 125.019 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 125.019 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 125.019

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
Chapter 125
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 125.019
125.019 Exemption from taxation; immunity.
(1) All powers, acts, and deeds hereby conferred or authorized are found to be and made a county purpose. Each project financed under the provisions of ss. 125.011-125.019 and the income therefrom, and any bonds issued under the provisions of s. 125.013 and the income therefrom, shall at all times be free from taxation within the state. The exemption granted by this subsection shall not be applicable to any tax imposed by chapter 220 on interest, income, or profits on debt obligations owned by corporations.
(2) In the exercise of the additional powers conferred by ss. 125.011-125.019 as heretofore and hereafter amended, the county and county commissioners of any such county shall have the same rights, privileges, powers and immunities of a county of the state.
History.ss. 2, 8, ch. 71-249; s. 1, ch. 73-327; s. 25, ch. 91-45.

F.S. 125.019 on Google Scholar

F.S. 125.019 on Casetext

Amendments to 125.019


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 125.019
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 125.019.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA,, 513 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 1987)

. . . in a repealer provision contained in the very law which created the franchise tax, to wit: Sections 125.019 . . .

F. REDFORD, Jr. G. B. B. v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 478 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 1985)

. . . In doing so, the circuit court rejected the argument that the leaseholds were exempt under sections 125.019 . . .