Summary
In Allegheny County v. Moon Township, 436 Pa. 54, 258 A.2d 630 (1969), we recently construed the above provisions with respect to "public property used for public purposes."
Summary of this case from Pittsburgh AppealOpinion
October 2, 1969.
November 11, 1969.
Taxation — Exemption — Public property used for public purposes — Exemption of property not only from property taxes but also from taxes on activities conducted on property — Townships — Greater Pittsburgh Airport — Tax on gross receipts of parking lot owned by Allegheny County and run by concessionaire — Article VIII, § 2, of Constitutions — Act of May 22, 1933, P. L. 853, as amended.
1. Public property used for public purposes is exempt not only from property taxes imposed by a township, but also from taxes on activities conducted on the property. [56]
2. In Article VIII, § 2, of the Constitution, and in § 204 of the Act of May 22, 1933, P. L. 853, the word "property" is used merely to describe the locus of what the legislature may exempt or is exempting, not the type of tax from which the legislature may exempt or is exempting it. [55-6]
3. In this case, it was Held that the township could not impose a tax on the gross receipts of a parking lot located at the Greater Pittsburgh Airport, owned by Allegheny County and run by a concessionaire.
Mr. Justice POMEROY concurred in the result.
Before BELL, C. J., JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN, ROBERTS and POMEROY, JJ.
Appeal, No. 214, March T., 1969, from decree of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, July T., 1967, No. 1003, in case of County of Allegheny et al. v. Township of Moon. Decree affirmed.
Equity. Before ELLENBOGEN, P. J.
Decree entered enjoining defendant from enforcing ordinance; exceptions by defendant thereto dismissed, and final decree entered. Defendant appealed.
John A. Metz, Jr., with him Erik F. Lawson, Jr., for appellant. Francis A. Barry, Deputy County Solicitor, with him Maurice Louik, County Solicitor, for Allegheny County, appellee.
Leonard Boreman, with him Baskin, Boreman, Sachs, Gondelman Craig, for appellee.
For a number of years, Moon Township has sought to tax various portions of the Greater Pittsburgh Airport. It has not always been successful. In December of 1966, the township passed an ordinance providing for a ten percent tax on the gross receipts of each commercial parking lot in the township. One of these lots is located at the airport; it is owned by Allegheny County and run by a concessionaire.
The concessionaire pays the county either 88.5 percent of the gross receipts, or $43,750, whichever is larger. All local, state and federal taxes are deductible from gross receipts. The county maintains various controls over the concessionaire, such as setting rates.
In April of 1967 the county sought to restrain the township from enforcing the ordinance against the county or the concessionaire. The chancellor held that the lot could not be taxed and issued a permanent injunction. We affirm.
In Moon Township Appeal, 387 Pa. 144, 127 A.2d 361 (1956), we upheld a trial court's finding that the parking lot in question here was "public property used for public purposes," and therefore tax-exempt. See Act of May 22, 1933, P. L. 853, art. II, § 204, as amended, 72 P. S. § 5020-204(g). We there stated that "[u]ndoubtedly the portions of the Airport employed in its actual operation . . . represent a public use which properly exempts them from taxation. . . . There is likewise no question but that property the use of which is reasonably necessary for the efficient operation of the Airport even though not indispensible or essential thereto, is also entitled to exemption." 387 Pa. at 148, 127 A.2d at 364 (emphasis in original). Under that standard, we held that the parking lot is "reasonably necessary" and therefore tax-exempt.
All parties agree that the parking lot in question is "public property used for public purposes." The township now attempts to distinguish Moon Township Appeal, supra, from the instant case, by arguing that the former dealt with property taxes and the instant case deals with an "excise tax." See Philadelphia v. Samuels, 338 Pa. 321, 12 A.2d 79 (1940) (holding parking lot tax an excise tax). Unfortunately for the township, the tax-exempt status of this parking lot does not depend on the label attached to the tax.
Article IX, § 1, of the Constitution of 1874, now Article VIII, § 2, provides: "The General Assembly may by law exempt from taxation: . . . (iii) That portion of public property which is actually and regularly used for public purposes . . . ." The Act of 1933, supra, provides: "The following property shall be exempt from all . . . township . . . tax, to wit: . . . (g) All other public property used for public purposes . . . ." Neither the constitution, nor the statute, say the exemption will be only for property taxes; the statute, in fact, expressly says "all tax." The word "property" is used merely to describe the locus of what the Legislature was exempting, not the type of tax it was exempting it from. There is no reason to assume that the Legislature did not fully exercise its constitutional power to exempt this property, not only from property taxes, but also from taxes on activities conducted on the property. We must therefore hold that the tax imposed here by the township on "public property used for public purposes" is invalid.
The decree of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County is affirmed.
Mr. Justice POMEROY concurs in the result.