Alachua County, Petitioners v. Expedia, Inc., Respondents — Pariente, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Pariente concurred in the result that the Tourist Development Tax applies only to the amount ultimately received by hotels, not to online travel companies' retained markup. She reasoned that the statute is ambiguous and therefore should be construed in favor of taxpayers, while rejecting reliance on legislative inaction because the court had not previously construed the statute. Justice Lewis, dissenting, would have taxed the full amount paid to the online travel companies because the statute refers to the total consideration charged.