The Globe and Mail

Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

Globe Investor

News Sources

Take control of your investments with the latest investing news and analysis

Press release from PR Newswire

Tennessee, Pennsylvania and Kentucky Courts Affirm Decisions for Online Travel Companies in Occupancy Tax Dispute

Friday, February 24, 2012

Tennessee, Pennsylvania and Kentucky Courts Affirm Decisions for Online Travel Companies in Occupancy Tax Dispute10:58 EST Friday, February 24, 2012Courts continue the growing trend of dismissing cases brought against online travel companies Decision represents a victory for consumers, travelers, the online travel companies and the travel and tourism industryWASHINGTON, Feb. 24, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Within the last two weeks, the Kentucky Supreme Court, a U.S. District Court in Tennessee and a state appeals court in Pennsylvania have all affirmed that local jurisdictions in Kentucky, Tennessee and Philadelphia cannot impose taxes on online travel companies (OTCs) for their reservation services under existing hotel occupancy tax ordinances.  These decisions follow a clear national trend, where state and federal courts have rebuffed efforts by state and local governments to attempt to impose hotel occupancy taxes on online travel companies for their services.[1]"We are pleased that these three courts have properly interpreted the law, and correctly concluded that online travel companies do not operate hotels or underpay taxes," said Joseph Rubin, President of the Interactive Travel Services Association (ITSA), the voice for the online travel companies and the companies that power the travel industry.   "We hope other municipalities will recognize this clear trend, and will read these thorough, well reasoned opinions," said Rubin.  "As demonstrated by these strong opinions, there is little basis for the litigation that some states and localities have pursued that ends up simply wasting taxpayer resources."  In the Tennessee case, the court granted summary judgment on the merits for the online travel companies against a class action brought by 73 counties and 56 municipalities.  The Tennessee case is particularly instructive because the judge in this case had denied a motion to dismiss by the OTCs in an earlier decision, which was based solely on the pleadings of the plaintiffs.  However, once the judge had the benefit of examining actual evidence about the actual practices of the OTCs, as opposed to the basic allegations of the counties, she dismissed the case. Ultimately, the Tennessee court found that the controlling statutory language at issue imposes the tax on "the operator" of a hotel, defined as a "person operating the hotel."  Although this concept appears fairly simple, the opinion is notable for the care in which it describes what OTCs do, and how it discusses and dismisses claims that OTCs "operate" hotels.In the Pennsylvania case as well, a unanimous court found that the online travel companies do not "operate" hotels, and that they are not therefore liable for a tax on their services. The Kentucky Supreme Court denied a motion to rehear the finding of the state Court of Appeals, so the Court of Appeal's ruling dismissing the case stands."Given the wide diversity of courts, localities and statutes relied on by the courts to repeatedly strike these cases down," Rubin said, "we urge local jurisdictions that are exploring these cases to do their own, independent research on the viability of these actions, which will show how precarious these cases really are."  About the Interactive Travel Services Association (ITSA)The Interactive Travel Services Association is the association for online travel companies and global distribution systems.  ITSA is the voice of the industry on public policy matters, and on educating policy makers, opinion leaders and the traveling public about the industry and matters of importance that will affect travel and tourism in general.ITSA's members include:  Amadeus (Madrid Stock Exchange: AMS.MC), Orbitz Worldwide (NYSE: OWW), Expedia (Nasdaq: EXPE), Priceline (Nasdaq: PCLN), Sabre Holdings, Travelport and Vegas.com.[1] In cases where trial courts have ruled on the merits, the courts have ordered judgment for the OTCs in 15 lower courts, and judgments have been affirmed by 6 appellate courts ? two federal circuits, and four state appellate courts. The fifteen (15) lower court decisions were in: City of Goodlettsville, TN; Orange, TX; Houston, TX; Findlay, OH; Columbus, OH; Pitt County, NC; Louisville, KY; Bowling Green, KY; Anaheim, CA; San Diego, CA; Philadelphia, PA; St. Louis, MO; Birmingham, AL; Santa Monica, CA; and State of Oklahoma.  The five (5) appellate courts decisions were in Pitt County, Louisville, St. Louis, Bowling Green and Houston.  www.interactivetravel.orgSOURCE Interactive Travel Services AssociationFor further information: CONTACT: Robin Reck, Communications Director, Interactive Travel Services Association (ITSA), +1-214-533-1996, rreck@interactivetravel.org