Sunday, August 12, 2012

Car Rental tax

AVIS BUDGET GROUP, INC., and THE HERTZ CORPORATION, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF NEWARK, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWARK, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF NEWARK, and DIRECTOR OF FINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWARK, Defendants-Respondents.

Case Information: Docket/Court: A-3801-10T4, Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division Date Issued: 08/01/2012 Argued March 13, 2012 Tax Type(s): Sales and Use Tax On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Docket No. L-6126-10. John Longstreth (K & L Gates, LLP) of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, argued the cause for appellants (Mark D. Marino and Mr. Longstreth, of counsel and on the brief; Daniel A. Suckerman, on the brief). Michael R. Griffinger argued the cause for respondents (GluckWalrath and Gibbons, P.C., attorneys; Mr. Griffinger, Robert C. Brady, Fruqan Mouzon, Brian P. McElroy, David A. Clark and Antonella Colella, on the brief).

OPINION

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION Before Judges Carchman, Fisher and Baxter. The opinion of the court was delivered by CARCHMAN, P.J.A.D. This appeal requires us to consider the validity of Ordinance 6PFS-I 050510 (the Ordinance), enacted by defendant City of Newark (the City), 1 levying a tax on all car rental transactions within the City's Second and Third Industrial Zones, the latter of which encompasses parts of Newark Liberty International Airport (the Airport). Plaintiffs Avis Budget Group (Avis) and Hertz Corporation (Hertz) challenge the Ordinance, asserting that it violates the Anti-Head Tax Act (AHTA), 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116, as well as 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. We conclude that the Ordinance is not a discriminatory tax or otherwise in violation of the AHTA or the dormant Commerce Clause. We determine that the Ordinance is a valid exercise of municipal authority. Accordingly, we affirm.

I.

On July 28, 2009, the New Jersey Legislature enacted the New Jersey Economic Stimulus Act of 2009, N.J.S.A. 40:48H-1 to -9, which, among other things, granted authority to certain municipalities to tax motor vehicle rental transactions taking place in designated industrial zones, specifically, zones within which commercial airports are located. N.J.S.A. 40:48H-2. The stated purpose of the legislation and the tax was to finance the redevelopment of certain municipalities. N.J.S.A. 40:48H-1. N.J.S.A. 40:48H-2, the operative provision granting authority to tax, provides in relevant part:
a. A municipality having a population in excess of 100,000 and within which is located a commercial airport which provides for a minimum of 10 regularly scheduled commercial airplane flights per day, or a municipality in which any portion of such an airport is located, by ordinance, may impose a tax on the rental of motor vehicles on such rental transactions that occur within a designated industrial zone of the municipality. Such tax shall be imposed on the person, corporation, or other legal entity that is permitted the use of a motor vehicle that it does not own for a period of time that is less than one year, in exchange for the payment of a fee, and shall be collected on behalf of the municipality by the person collecting such rental fee, in accordance with such procedures as shall be established in the ordinance imposing the tax.
The local motor vehicle rental tax rate imposed under an ordinance adopted pursuant to this section shall not exceed five percent of the total amount of the fee charged for the rental of the motor vehicle, excluding any taxes and surcharges.
The City, which has a population in excess of 100,000 and “within which [the Airport] is located,” qualified under this provision. On April 27, 2010, the City Council, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:48H-2, introduced an ordinance to tax car rental transactions. During a public meeting to consider the proposed ordinance, council members informed the public that the Ordinance was intended to tax “outsiders” at the Airport but not Newark residents. Following the meeting, the Council passed the Ordinance, and the Mayor signed it into law on May 7, 2010. It was published on May 14, 2010. The Ordinance provides in relevant part:
10:22A-3. IMPOSITION OF MOTOR VEHICLE RENTAL TAX.
There is hereby imposed on the person, corporation or other legal entity that is permitted the use of a motor vehicle that it does not own for a period of time that is less than one year, in exchange for the payment of a fee, a tax of five (5%) percent on the fee charged for the rental of such motor vehicle, excluding any taxes and surcharges, in respect of rental transactions that occur within the industrial zone. This tax is in addition to any other taxes or surcharges.
10:22A-4. DESIGNATION OF INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
a. The City hereby designates the following portion of the City as an “industrial zone” for purposes of the motor vehicle rental tax authorized by the Act and this chapter, such portion not exceeding, in the aggregate, fifty percent (50%) of the territory of the City: All of the territory within the City which is, as of the effective date of this ordinance, located [within] the “Second Industrial District” and the “Third Industrial District[,]”[] as such areas are established by Title XL, Chapter 2 of the Newark Municipal Code. The area so designated as an industrial zone under this paragraph a. shall not be altered by any subsequent revision of the City's zoning districts, but rather shall be amended only by an ordinance expressly amending this ordinance in accordance with the [A]ct. b. The City hereby determines that the industrial zone designated in paragraph a. of this Section 10:22A-4 of the City constitutes an area having, or intended to have, predominantly industrial, port, airport, and related uses.
The Third Industrial Zone encompasses parts of the Airport and the Port Newark Marine Terminal. All of the ten rental car companies that are currently affected by the Ordinance are located within the Third Industrial Zone. Plaintiffs are two of the ten affected companies. Plaintiffs challenged the validity of the Ordinance in the Law Division, asserting that it violated State due process rights, was arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable, and was contrary to the AHTA and the Commerce Clause. At the hearing on the cross-motions for summary judgment, the parties focused on whether the tax violated the AHTA. The City argued that the court could not consider the issue since there was no private right of action to enforce the AHTA. On the merits, it claimed that the Ordinance did not exclusively affect Airport businesses because three rental car companies located in the Third Industrial Zone were not located “at the Airport.” Plaintiffs countered that two of the referenced “companies” were actually Avis parking lots where no rental transactions occurred, and were unaffected by the tax, and the third, Action Car Rental, was “at the Airport” because it serviced the Airport by shuttle bus from an Airport hotel. In a written opinion, Judge Michael R. Casale rejected the City's claim that plaintiffs did not have a private right of action to enforce the AHTA, relying on Interface Group, Inc. v. Massachusetts Port Authority, 816 F.2d 9, 16 (1st Cir. 1987) , and Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. County of Kent, 955 F.2d 1054, 1058 (6th Cir. 1992), aff'd, 510 U.S. 355, 114 S. Ct. 855, 127 L. Ed. 2d 183 (1994) (deciding the questions presented on other grounds and not reaching the issue of the implied right of action). He rejected contrary decisions by the Seventh and Tenth Circuits in Southwest Air Ambulance, Inc. v. City of Las Cruces, 268 F.3d 1162, 1169 (10th Cir. 2001) , and Miller Aviation v. Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors, 273 F.3d 722, 729 (7th Cir. 2001) . However, since plaintiffs averred violations of 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 in the complaint, the trial court relied on Southwest, supra, 268 F.3d at 1176 , to conclude that plaintiffs were not precluded from either enforcing the AHTA or challenging the Ordinance. Turning to the merits, the judge addressed the issue of whether the Ordinance violated the AHTA. Citing Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority v. City of Burbank, 76 Cal. Rptr. 2d 297, 298 (Cal. App. 1998) , the judge concluded that the Ordinance did not offend the AHTA:
Here, the tax is not on air commerce; it is on the fee paid for renting a car. Second, the tax is paid by the customer, not the businesses. Third, the tax is not imposed exclusively on airport businesses, but rather it must be paid by any rental car facility that is open or will open in the qualified zones. Finally, the tax is payable by anyone who rents a car in the designated zones, not only air travelers[;] and air travelers who wish to avoid the tax can travel outside of the industrial zones and rent a car elsewhere. The tax at issue herein is very similar to the tax upheld by the California Court of Appeals [in Burbank] and is the type of tax authorized by 4[9] U.S.C.[A.] § 40116(e)(1).
The court neither found a violation of the AHTA, nor a violation of the Commerce Clause. The judge held: (1) where Congress has legislated, as it did in enacting the AHTA, courts need not determine whether state action authorized by the statute has violated the Commerce Clause; and (2) the statements City Council members made during the public meeting did not affect the Commerce Clause analysis when the City enacted the Ordinance “in strict compliance with ... [N.J.S.A. 40:48H-2].” Finally, the judge determined that the City Council followed proper procedures in enacting the Ordinance, and the Ordinance neither offended due process nor was arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. The court granted the City's motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiffs' complaint. This appeal followed.

II.

The City reiterates its argument that even if the tax violates the AHTA, dismissal must be affirmed because there is no private right of action to enforce the AHTA. Plaintiffs counter that even if there is no private right of action, an AHTA violation may be remedied under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. That the AHTA permits a private right of action is no longer a viable argument. The AHTA is within the regulatory purview of the Department of Transportation under the direction of the Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary). See Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Cnty. of Kent, 510 U.S. 355, 366-67, 114 S. Ct. 855, 863, 127 L. Ed. 2d 183, 195 (1994) (observing that the “Secretary of Transportation is charged with administering ... the AHTA”); Township of Tinicum v. U.S. Dep't of Transp., 582 F.3d 482, 484 (3d Cir. 2009) (same); Miller, supra, 273 F.3d at 729-30 (same); Southwest, supra, 268 F.3d at 1169-70 (same). Because the AHTA is encompassed in the Federal Aviation Act (FAA), 2 alleged violations of the AHTA are remedied through an administrative process initiated by filing a complaint with the Secretary. 49 U.S.C.A. § 46101. See also 14 C.F.R. 16.1 (providing that the FAA will determine disputes under AHTA except for challenges to fees by air carriers against airport proprietors). Determinations by the Secretary on questions involving the AHTA may be appealed to a federal district court. 49 U.S.C.A. § 46110. The First and Sixth Circuits have held that Congress intended to create a private right of action in the former AHTA, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1513, based on the fact that that statute lacked an administrative enforcement scheme. Interface, supra, 816 F.2d at 16 ; Northwest Airlines, supra, 955 F.2d at 1058 . The United States Supreme Court subsequently granted certiorari in Northwest Airlines; although it did not consider whether the AHTA created private rights of action, the Court disagreed with the First and Sixth Circuits' construction of the AHTA when it observed that the AHTA was encompassed by the FAA, which statute reflected an administrative enforcement scheme. Northwest Airlines, supra, 510 U.S. at 366-67, 114 S. Ct. at 863, 127 L. Ed. 2d at 195 . The Seventh and Tenth Circuits went further in rejecting Interface and Northwest Airlines. These courts held that since the AHTA is included in the FAA, 3 Congress intended for public enforcement of the AHTA and did not create a private right of action. Miller, supra, 273 F.3d at 729-31 ; Southwest, supra, 268 F.3d at 1169-70 . Courts that have considered the issue since the Supreme Court's decision in Northwest Airlines have followed Southwest and Miller. See Air Transp. Ass'n of Am. v. City of Los Angeles, 844 F. Supp. 550, 555 (C.D. Cal. 1994) (concluding that AHTA lacks private right of action); Susquehanna Area Reg'l Airport Auth. v. Middletown Area Sch. Dist., 918 A.2d 813, 816 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007) (same). Other courts have rejected the claim that the AHTA may be enforced in state court under Section 1983 based on the premise that the FAA provides a comprehensive remedial scheme for AHTA violations that is sufficient to foreclose Section 1983 actions. See, e.g., New England Legal Found. v. Mass. Port Auth., 883 F.2d 157, 176 (1st Cir. 1989) ; Air Transp. Ass'n of Am. v. Public Util. Comm'n, 833 F.2d 200, 207 (9th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1236, 108 S. Ct. 2904, 101 L. Ed. 2d 936 (1988) ; Montauk-Caribbean Airways, supra, 784 F.2d at 98 ; Air Transp. Ass'n, supra, 844 F. Supp. at 559-60 . Even if a violation of the AHTA could be remedied under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983, a party would be required to assert a violation of a federal right, not merely a federal law, “to avail himself [or herself] of [Section] 1983.” Southwest, supra, 268 F.3d at 1173 . In Southwest, the Tenth Circuit held that the plaintiff airline could enforce the AHTA under Section 1983 because state and municipal taxation of airlines based on gross receipts, a practice prohibited by the AHTA, would violate a federal right afforded to airlines to be free of those taxes. Id. at 1173-74. Southwest does not support a finding that airport businesses have a federal right under the AHTA. Airport businesses have no right to be totally free from state or local taxes based on gross receipts, and they remain subject to nonexclusive taxes. In sum, we will not apply Southwest to car rental companies at the Airport and find no basis for diverging from the overwhelming authority holding that the AHTA may not be enforced in a suit under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. The AHTA allows airport proprietors to levy reasonable rental, landing and service fees from airline carriers for using airport facilities. Challenges to the reasonableness of fees or charges must be brought before the Secretary. See Miller, supra, 273 F.3d at 725-26, 731 (noting that there is no private right of action in the AHTA to challenge the fees Milwaukee County charged an airport hangar owner); Southwest, supra, 268 F.3d at 1170 (holding that there is no private right of action to challenge local ordinance that set fees at airport); Air Transp. Ass'n, supra, 844 F. Supp. at 555 (concluding that the Secretary has discretion to remedy unreasonable fees). 4 There is no private right of enforcement under the AHTA.

III.

Plaintiffs next argue that the Ordinance violates the AHTA by imposing a tax on rental car companies at the Airport. Even though there is no private cause of action, we will address the merits and review the trial court's grant of summary judgment to defendants. We first identify the standard of review. Our review of the grant or denial of summary judgment is de novo, using the same legal standard as the trial court. Dugan Constr. Co. v. N.J. Tpk. Auth., 398 N.J. Super. 229, 238 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 196 N.J. 346 (2008) ; Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Boylan, 307 N.J. Super. 162, 167 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 154 N.J. 608 (1998) . Summary judgment is proper if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, no genuine issue of material fact is disputed. Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520, 540 (1995); R. 4:46-2(c) . The trial court's factual findings are binding on appeal when supported by adequate, substantial and credible evidence in the record. Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 484 (1974) . Conversely, the trial court's conclusions of law “and the legal consequences that flow from established facts are not entitled to any special deference.” Manalapan Realty, L.P. v. Twp. Comm. of Manalapan, 140 N.J. 366, 378 (1995) . Under the Supremacy Clause, federal law is “the supreme Law of the Land[.]” U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2. State laws that “'interfere with, or are contrary to the laws of [C]ongress, made in pursuance of the [C]onstitution[,]' are invalid.” Vail v. Pan Am Corp., 260 N.J. Super. 292, 297 (App. Div. 1992) (quoting Wisconsin Pub. Intervenor v. Mortier, 501 U.S. 597, 604, 111 S. Ct. 2476, 2481, 115 L. Ed. 2d 532, 542 (1991) ). The “focus of analysis is on the intent of Congress.” Miranda v. Fridman, 276 N.J. Super. 20, 25 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 138 N.J. 271 (1994) . Congressional intent may be express or implied. Ibid. To determine if a conflict exists between state and federal law, a court must consider “'the relationship between [the] ... laws as they are interpreted and applied, not merely as they are written.'” R.F. v Abbott Labs., 162 N.J. 596, 618 (2000) (quoting Jones v. Rath Packing Co., 430 U.S. 519, 526, 97 S. Ct. 1305, 1310, 51 L. Ed. 2d 604, 614 (1977) ). Congress amended 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d), when it enacted the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAA), Pub. L. No. 103-305, 108 Stat. 1569 (1994), to include the following prohibition:
(2) (A) A State, political subdivision of a State, or authority acting for a State or political subdivision may not do any of the following acts because those acts unreasonably burden and discriminate against interstate commerce:
.... (iv) levy or collect a tax, fee, or charge, first taking effect after August 23, 1994, exclusively upon any business located at a commercial service airport or operating as a permittee of such an airport other than a tax, fee, or charge wholly utilized for airport or aeronautical purposes.
[49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d).]
In the nearly twenty years since the enactment of this amendment, “43 States and the District of Columbia” have levied taxes on airport car rental companies by applying non-exclusive taxes to “all similar entities within that taxing jurisdiction.” 157 Cong. Rec. H45, 2199 (daily ed. March 31, 2011) (statements of Rep. Greg Cohen and Rep. Sam Graves). 5 In 2009, the Legislature enacted N.J.S.A. 40:48H-2, which authorized qualifying municipalities to levy a tax on car rental transactions that “occur within a designated industrial zone of the municipality.” Ibid. The Legislature intended for N.J.S.A. 40:48H-2 to apply to “the City of Elizabeth and the City of Newark,” the two municipalities in which sections of the Airport are located. Assembly Appropriations Committee Statement to Assembly Bill No. 4048 (June 11, 2009). The legislative history provides that car rental companies at the Airport generated $132.7 million in revenue in the first nine months of the fiscal year 2009. Ibid. We review the Ordinance against this background. In determining whether a statute violates the AHTA, the Supreme Court has looked to the statute's purpose and effect. See Aloha Airlines v. Dir. of Taxation, 464 U.S. 7, 13-14, 104 S. Ct. 291, 295, 78 L. Ed. 2d 10, 16 (1983) (“The manner in which the [Hawaii] ... [L]egislature has described ... [the statute] cannot mask the fact that the purpose and effect of [it] are to impose a levy upon the gross receipts of airlines.”). See also Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274, 279, 97 S. Ct. 1076, 1079 , 51 L. Ed. 2d 326, 331 (1977) (noting that, in determining whether a tax violates the Commerce Clause, the Court considers the tax statute's “practical effect,” not its formal language). Burbank provides assistance in our consideration of the issues before us. In Burbank, the court considered whether a local parking tax levied pursuant to a city ordinance was precluded by the AHTA. Burbank, supra, 76 Cal. Rptr. 2d at 298 . The tax affected customers at fifteen parking lots in the City of Burbank; however, three lots were within two miles of the airport, and ninety percent of the tax revenues derived from parking lots “at or near the airport.” Ibid. The court concluded that the tax was not precluded by the AHTA, most notably 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)(2)(A)(iv). The court said:
First, the TPT [tax] is not a tax on air commerce. It is a tax on the fee paid for short-term parking. The AHTA does not apply to taxes on airport ground transportation services, such as parking facilities. Second, because the TPT is paid by the customer, not the parking lot operator, it is analogous to the “sales or use taxes” expressly permitted by the AHTA. Third, the TPT is not imposed exclusively upon airport businesses, because it is collected by all qualified parking lots in the City.
[Burbank, supra, 76 Cal. Rptr. 2d at 300 (citations omitted).]
Susquehanna, a more recent Pennsylvania decision, also upheld a parking tax under the AHTA, for many of the same reasons provided in Burbank:
[P]arking patrons, not airport businesses, bear the burden of this tax; a tax on parking transactions is not a head tax. The incidence of the tax is the parking fee transaction, and the measure of the tax is on the transaction fee itself. Further, it is undisputed here that non-airport parking transactions are subject to the parking tax, and there is no exclusivity sub judice.
[Susquehanna, supra, 918 A.2d at 816 .]
As in both Burbank and Susquehanna, here, the tax is not “wholly utilized for airport or aeronautical purposes” under 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)(2)(A)(iv). We must determine whether the City has imposed the tax “exclusively upon any business [that is] located at [the Airport]” or is “operating as a permittee of [the Airport][.]” 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)(2)(A)(iv). Judge Casale, relying on Burbank, held that the Ordinance did not violate the AHTA because it levied a tax “on the fee paid for renting a car” and “not on air commerce.” In finding that the AHTA did not apply to ground transportation, the Burbank court cited Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Palm Springs, 955 F.2d 30 (9th Cir. 1992) , which analyzed the former AHTA, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1513, which statute applied only to air transportation by aircraft. Id. at 31. See also Salem Transp. Co. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 611 F. Supp. 254, 257 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (rejecting claim by ground transportation provider that a fee violated 49 U.S.C.A. § 1513). Two years after Alamo was decided, Congress amended the FAA to prohibit taxes exclusively levied on any business located at a commercial service airport. 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)(2)(A)(vi). The current statute does not distinguish between air and ground transportation. The Law Division held that the Ordinance levied a tax not on a “business” at the Airport, but on a consumer. The trial court reasoned that the tax was permissible under the AHTA as “the type of [sales] tax” allowed by 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(e)(1). This is consistent with the reasoning in Susquehanna, where the court upheld a parking tax on parking transactions at or near the airport because the “measure of the tax [was] on the transaction fee” and was not a head tax. Supra, 918 A.2d at 817. A state may levy “sales or use taxes on the sale of goods or services” that do not violate subsection (d) of the AHTA. 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(e)(1). When subsection (e) is read in conjunction with subsection (d), the AHTA states that a state or municipality is prohibited from levying any “sales or use taxes” exclusively upon any business located at a commercial service airport. 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)-(e). The relevant inquiry is whether there is a meaningful distinction between the terms “consumer” and “business” under these provisions. We conclude that the AHTA's prohibition against taxes levied upon a business does not extend to consumers. To be sure, Congress expressly precluded taxes levied on consumers traveling in air commerce under 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(b), but did not do so under 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)(2)(A)(iv), notwithstanding Congress' awareness that businesses, including airlines, could pass on the taxes imposed on them to air travelers. See Niagara Frontier Transp. Auth. v. E. Airlines, Inc., 658 F. Supp. 247, 251 (W.D.N.Y. 1987) (stating that “Congress was aware that if the tax ... were assessed to the airline, it would, in all probability, be passed on to the airline passengers”). In Susquehanna, the court explained:
The difference then between a business privilege tax and a transaction tax is not just the stated subject of the tax, but how the tax is measured. A business privilege tax is a tax imposed on all of the gross receipts from all of the businesses' activities anywhere, so long as the base of operations within the political subdivision contributes to those activities because the privilege of doing business is “far more than the sum of transactions ... performed within the territorial limits of the taxing entity.” A transaction tax, however, is imposed on the receipts from the designated transactions that are actually performed within the taxing entity, because its subject is only the transaction and not the privilege of engaging in a business that allows the transaction to be consummated.
[Supra, 918 A.2d at 818 (quoting Airpark Int'l I v. Interboro Sch. Dist., 735 A.2d 646, 647 (Pa. 1999) ).]
The statute provides that levying exclusive taxes on businesses located at an airport is one of those acts that “unreasonably burden and discriminate against interstate commerce[.]” 49 U.S.C.A. § 40116(d)(2)(A). Congress determined that, like airlines, airport businesses are engaged in interstate commerce. This is because airport businesses, like airlines, service air travelers and not in-state users. See Denver v. Cont'l Air Lines, Inc., 712 F. Supp. 834, 840 (D. Colo. 1989) (observing 49 U.S.C.A. § 1513 was intended to prohibit “the imposition of such local taxes, fees, and charges that would be passed on to the flying public”). As the Seventh Circuit noted in dicta in Indianapolis Airport Authority v. American Airlines, Inc., 733 F.2d 1262 (7th Cir. 1984) , customers of car rental companies located at airports are air travelers, and the “rental fees” that are imposed upon those companies by airport proprietors are similar to head taxes on air travelers:
The parking lot is used by emplaning passengers and by people picking up deplaning passengers. The car rental agencies are used by emplaning and deplaning passengers, and likewise the food stands and newsstands. This means that when the airport charges a rental fee to concessionaires it is as if it were charging a landing fee to the airlines or imposing a head tax on the passengers.
[Id. at 1267-68.]
See also Southerland v. St. Croix Taxicab Ass'n, 315 F.2d 364, 369 (3d Cir. 1963) (finding that the airline passengers' prearranged transportation was part of the “interstate journey,” and thus, an exclusive franchise granted to a taxicab company by the Virgin Islands Territory to transport people to and from the airport was an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce); Charter Limousine, Inc. v. Dade Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 678 F.2d 586, 589 (5th Cir. 1982) (following Southerland). Although the express language of the AHTA makes clear that a consumer is not a “business,” the statute prohibits taxes upon consumers because such taxes constitute taxes upon businesses located at airports. Here, car rental operators have an obligation under the Ordinance to collect the tax, and the failure to do so subjects them to penalties; consumers do not bear the whole obligation to remit the tax. The Ordinance has been carefully drafted to not violate any limitations imposed by the AHTA. The trial court held that the tax was non-exclusive because it was similar to the parking tax upheld in Burbank. There, the tax applied to every parking lot in the City of Burbank, except for exempt lots used for medical facilities, and metered and monthly parking. Supra, 76 Cal. Rptr. 2d at 298. Here, rental car companies in the City are not subject to the tax unless they are located in either the Second or Third Industrial Zone, both of which districts extended well beyond the boundaries of the Airport. In fact, the record indicates that the industrial zones at issue together comprise over forty percent of the area of the City, and the Airport occupies only a portion of the Third Industrial Zone. The AHTA does not define the term “exclusively.” As such, it is unclear whether, in order to be deemed non-exclusive, a tax must apply to all, or only some, of the like-kind businesses not located at an airport. The holding in Susquehanna suggests that, unlike the tax in Burbank, a sales tax is non-exclusive if it affects any non-airport transactions and need not affect every like-kind business within the taxing jurisdiction. Susquehanna, supra, 918 A.2d at 817 . The AHTA prevents the imposition of taxes exclusively on airport businesses, but it does not preclude taxes that disproportionately affect the airport businesses. A tax is non-exclusive if it affects at least one business that is not located at an airport. While all of the car rental companies affected by the tax here are located in the Third Industrial Zone, either at or near the Airport, and they all service the Airport in some capacity, they also provide car rental services for and store rental cars to be used by customers at locations other than the Airport. Significantly, the AHTA does not prohibit a tax on businesses near an airport. Here, the Ordinance does not apply only to the rental transactions that occur at the Airport, even though all of the affected businesses are in the Third Industrial Zone. As the trial judge noted:
[T]he tax is payable to anyone who rents a car in the designated zones, not only air travelers[;] and air travelers who wish to avoid the tax can travel outside of the industrial zones and rent a car elsewhere.
We give little weight to the statements City Council members made at the public hearing on adopting the Ordinance. We look to the adopted Ordinance first rather than to the political process that may have generated it. Political rhetoric will not overcome the language of the Ordinance. We recognize that the State retains the power to impose a sales tax upon transactions near an airport, which power will not be abridged absent clear and manifest congressional intent in the AHTA to bar sales taxes imposed on a “consumer” of airport car rental businesses under the circumstances presented here.

IV.

Finally, we address the argument that the Ordinance violates the Commerce Clause. We reject this claim. Plaintiffs have failed to address the threshold question in the dormant Commerce Clause analysis, which is whether Congress has exercised its plenary power under the Commerce Clause in the field at issue. See Western & S. Life Ins. Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization, 451 U.S. 648, 652-53, 101 S. Ct. 2070, 2075, 68 L. Ed. 2d 514, 520 (1981) . See also National Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. _______ , _______ S. Ct. _______ , 183 L. Ed. 2d 450 (2012) (slip op. at 17-18) (recognizing that Congress has broad authority under the Commerce Clause, not confined to the regulation of commerce among the states, and extending to activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, including activities that do so only when aggregated with similar activities of others). Congress may authorize a state to engage in regulation that would otherwise violate the dormant Commerce Clause by manifesting its “'unambiguous intent'” in a federal statute to approve of the violation. Southwest, supra, 268 F.3d at 1177 (quoting Wyoming v. Oklahoma, 502 U.S. 437, 458, 112 S. Ct. 789, 802, 117 L. Ed. 2d 1, 24-25 (1992) ). When Congress authorizes a state to act, courts may not review the state taxes or other regulations for violations of the dormant Commerce Clause. Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe, 455 U.S. 130, 154, 102 S. Ct. 894, 910 , 71 L. Ed. 2d 21, 40 (1982) . In the AHTA, Congress expressly permitted states to tax airport businesses in the manner provided in subsection (e). See Burbank, supra, 76 Cal. Rptr. 2d at 301 (finding that the tax fell within subsection (e) and was therefore “expressly permitted by the AHTA” and did not violate the Commerce Clause). We agree that the tax enabled by the Ordinance falls within the scope of congressional authorization provided in the AHTA. Dormant Commerce Clause review is therefore precluded. See Hughes v. Oklahoma, 441 U.S. 322, 336, 99 S. Ct. 1727, 1736, 60 L. Ed. 2d 250, 262 (1979) (stating the analysis). For the sake of completeness, we recognize that even if Congress had not granted the City express permission in the AHTA, under a traditional dormant Commerce Clause analysis, a tax that affects interstate commerce will be sustained if it passes scrutiny under the test articulated in Complete Auto. Our Court has followed the Complete Auto test, noting that
[t]he [Complete Auto] test will sustain a state tax using a formula apportionment method “[(1)] when the tax is applied to an activity with a substantial nexus with the taxing State, [(2)] is fairly apportioned, [(3)] does not discriminate against interstate commerce, and [(4)] is fairly related to the services provided by the State.”
[Whirlpool Props., Inc. v. Dir., Div. of Taxation, 208 N.J. 141, 163 (2011) (quoting Complete Auto, supra, 430 U.S. at 279, 97 S. Ct. at 1079, 51 L. Ed. 2d at 331) .]
Here, the Ordinance applies to car rental activity that has a substantial nexus to the City because the rental car agencies and the Airport are located in the City, and customers “drive over City streets” to pick up and return the rented car. Burbank, supra, Cal. Rptr. at 1225-26 . The tax is fairly apportioned because the rental car transaction occurs within the City, and the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce because every person in the City must pay the tax if a car is rented from either the Second or Third Industrial Zone. Lastly, the tax would likely be reasonably related to the services provided by the City because, as we have previously noted, customers drive on the City's streets using the cars they have rented, and additionally, their rights under the rental car contracts are protected by New Jersey law. See Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Montana, 453 U.S. 609, 624-26, 101 S. Ct. 2946, 2957-58, 69 L. Ed. 2d 884, 899-900 (1981) (stating that where a general revenue tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce and is apportioned to activities occurring within the State, the tax is valid if reasonably related to the benefits afforded by the State). The Ordinance does not violate the Commerce Clause. Affirmed.
1
Additional defendants include the City Council of the City of Newark, Mayor of the City of Newark and Director of Finance of the City of Newark.
2

Congress enacted the FAA in 1958. Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (FAA), Pub. L. No. 85-726, 72 Stat. 731 (1958). In 1994, Congress restructured the FAA through the Federal Aviation Authorization Act (FAAA). Pub. L. No. 103-305, 108 Stat. 1569 (1994).
3

The First Circuit also found that Congress did not intend to create private rights of action within the FAA. Bonano v. E. Caribbean Airline Corp., 365 F.3d 81, 84-86 (1st Cir. 2004) . Bonano is consistent with holdings of the Second, Third, Ninth and Tenth Circuits that the FAA does not contain private rights of action. Schmeling v. NORDAM, 97 F.3d 1336, 1344 (10th Cir. 1996) ; G.S. Rasmussen & Assoc., Inc. v. Kalitta Flying Serv., Inc., 958 F.2d 896, 901-02 (9th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 959, 113 S. Ct. 2927, 124 L. Ed. 2d 678 (1993) ; Montauk-Caribbean Airways, Inc. v. Hope, 784 F.2d 91, 97 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 872, 107 S. Ct. 248, 93 L. Ed. 2d 172 (1986) ; Wolf v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 544 F.2d 134, 137-38 (3d Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 915, 97 S. Ct. 1327, 51 L. Ed. 2d 593 (1977) . See also Enyeart v. Minnesota, 408 F. Supp. 2d 797, 806-07 (D. Minn. 2006), aff'd, 218 Fed. Appx. 560 (8th Cir. 2007) (dismissing a complaint on the grounds that there is no private right of action in the FAA).
4

We do recognize limitations to the AHTA that are relevant here. AHTA does not grant either the Secretary or federal courts exclusive jurisdiction to decide the validity of a local tax ordinance, and state courts retain the ability to hear issues of state tax administration. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 1341 (providing that federal district courts “shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law” where a speedy and efficient remedy may be had in state courts).
5

Some members of Congress have viewed such a tax as exploiting a “loophole” in the AHTA, thereby violating the spirit of the Act. During the March 31, 2011 debate on the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011, Representatives Graves and Cohen proposed an amendment to the AHTA that, were it adopted by Congress, would prohibit all but general sales taxes on car rental companies at commercial airports. Ibid. See also H.R. Rep. No. 112-45 (2011). Despite this effort, Congress did not amend the AHTA to proscribe non-exclusive taxes when it passed H.R. 658 as the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-95, 126 Stat. 11, 87 (2012).

63 comments:

  1. Are you providing your services out side Sydney, We are here with our Cars Rentals services in UK and many more places.

    ReplyDelete
  2. this is such a nice and useful information for us...i appreciate urs word........Wedding car hire

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great informative post. I get more information from this. I am delighted to have found this post …That information is so helpful to us.Will be visit again on your website.
    Car Hire Delhi

    ReplyDelete
  4. lax car rental Professional car rentals help you not only save money on gasoline but also assure you a relaxing trip in Los Angeles. Good car rental service agencies offer latest models of vehicles. From vans, shuttles, buses, you get a wide number of options to choose from. All the vehicles are high tech with latest inputs attached.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am really thankful to the holder of this web site who has shared
    this enormous paragraph at at this place.
    My homepage ; printable coupons for kohls

    ReplyDelete
  6. great publish, very informative. I wonder why the
    other experts of this sector do not understand this.
    You must proceed your writing. I'm sure, you've a huge readers' base already!
    Also see my web site > kohls-printable-coupons.net

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi there, after reading this amazing paragraph i
    am too happy to share my knowledge here with mates.
    Stop by my weblog ... Kohls 30 Percent Off Coupons

    ReplyDelete
  8. This post is in fact a nice one it helps new web viewers,
    who are wishing for blogging.
    Also visit my weblog :: Work from home jobs

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is an extremely well written article.
    I will make sure to bookmark it and return to read more of your useful information.
    Thanks for the post. I'll definitely return.
    my webpage: Big adult dating web site

    ReplyDelete
  10. of сourse lіke уour web-ѕite hοwever you have to test the spelling on sevеral of yοur pοѕts.
    Many of thеm are rife with ѕpelling problеms аnd I find it very trоublesоme to inform the
    гeаlity nevегtheless Ι'll certainly come back again.
    My web site www.deepflowstudios.com

    ReplyDelete
  11. of cοuгse liκe уour web-site hoωevег you
    haѵe tο test thе sρelling on ѕеvеrаl of yοuг
    posts. Ϻаny of thеm are гife with spelling problems anԁ I find it νery troublеsоme to іnform the reality neνerthеlеss Ι'll certainly come back again.
    Also see my page: www.deepflowstudios.com

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wonderful goods from you, man. I have understand your stuff previous to and
    you're just too great. I actually like what you have acquired here, really like what you are stating and the way in which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you still care for to keep it wise. I cant wait to read far more from you. This is actually a wonderful site.

    Feel free to visit my website rmr calculator
    Also see my webpage - bmr calculator

    ReplyDelete
  13. Howԁy, Theгe's no doubt that your site may be having internet browser compatibility problems. When I take a look at your blog in Safari, it looks fine however, if opening in I.E., it has some overlapping issues. I merely wanted to provide you with a quick heads up! Apart from that, fantastic site!

    Feel free to visit my web site :: vida vacations
    Also see my webpage > vida vacations

    ReplyDelete
  14. We stumbled over here by a different web page and thought I
    might check things out. I like what I see so now i am following you.
    Look forward to looking over your web page again.


    My web page ... proximity

    ReplyDelete
  15. Very good blog! Do you have any hints for aspiring writers?
    I'm planning to start my own website soon but I'm a little lost on everything.
    Would you propose starting with a free platform like Wordpress or go for a paid option?
    There are so many options out there that I'm completely confused .. Any suggestions? Bless you!

    Feel free to visit my web page: search
    Also see my webpage - webster

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi! Do you know if they make any plugins to
    assist with SEO? I'm trying to get my blog to rank for some targeted keywords but I'm not seeing very good success.
    If you know of any please share. Many thanks!

    My web blog: trees

    ReplyDelete
  17. I’m not that much of a online reader to be honest but your sites really nice, keep it up!
    I'll go ahead and bookmark your website to come back later. All the best

    my web-site folije

    ReplyDelete
  18. Fantastic post but I was wondering if you could write a
    litte more on this subject? I'd be very thankful if you could elaborate a little bit more. Bless you!

    Here is my web site :: removal tree

    ReplyDelete
  19. Αsκing questіonѕ are actuallу niсe thing if you are not unԁеrstanding anythіng totally, howеver thіѕ article giѵеs fastiԁiοus understanding even.


    Ηere is my wеb pagе; Best cab company
    Also see my website: streetsmarttaxi.com

    ReplyDelete
  20. I cοnѕtаntly spent my half an hour to read
    thiѕ wеblog's articles or reviews everyday along with a cup of coffee.

    Also visit my web-site :: Chemietoilette

    ReplyDelete
  21. I am curious to find out what blog system you happen to be
    using? I'm having some minor security problems with my latest blog and I'd like to find something more safeguarded.
    Do you have any solutions?

    Also visit my weblog; 88371

    ReplyDelete
  22. Nice weblog right here! Additionally your website quite a bit up
    fast! What host are you the use of? Can I get your affiliate hyperlink for your host?
    I want my web site loaded up as fast as yours lol

    Also visit my homepage recommended site

    ReplyDelete
  23. Whats up very cool web site!! Guy .. Beautiful ..
    Wonderful .. I will bookmark your site and take the feeds also?
    I'm satisfied to search out a lot of helpful info right here in the put up, we'd like
    work out more techniques on this regard, thank you for sharing.
    . . . . .

    my weblog - Read More Here

    ReplyDelete
  24. Prеtty! Thiѕ hаs bеen an іncrediblу
    ωonderful artiсle. Many thanκs for pгoviding thiѕ
    іnfoгmаtion.

    Revieω my web blοg lloyd irvin

    ReplyDelete
  25. Why viewers still make use of to read news papers when in this technological world all is available on web?


    Feel free to visit my website; Useful content

    ReplyDelete
  26. certainly like your web-site however you have to test the spelling
    on several of your posts. Several of them are rife with
    spelling problems and I find it very troublesome to inform the truth nevertheless I'll certainly come again again.

    Also visit my web site; get names golden retriever facts

    ReplyDelete
  27. Fantastic website you have here but I was curious about if you knew of any message boards that cover the same topics discussed in this article?
    I'd really love to be a part of group where I can get comments from other knowledgeable people that share the same interest. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Many thanks!

    My weblog :: white retriever

    ReplyDelete
  28. According to the destinations you have in mind, it pays to be prepared and able to negotiate to earn your business,
    get a budget paphos car hire in Kuching? Parking at
    the airport allows unlimited mileage, the infamous collision
    damage waiver - and all the other traditional
    delicacies. One reason is because not all paphos car hire abroad companies will have drivers on hand.



    Feel free to visit my web site ... Www.Websquash.org

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hello there, I found your web site by means of Google whilst searching for a
    related matter, your site came up, it seems good.
    I've bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.
    Hi there, simply became aware of your blog through Google, and found that it's truly informative.
    I am going to watch out for brussels. I'll be grateful should you continue this in future. Numerous people can be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!

    Have a look at my web page ... full article

    ReplyDelete
  30. Thanks for finally talking about > "Car Rental tax" < Loved it!

    Feel free to visit my webpage - check this out

    ReplyDelete
  31. Spot on with this write-up, I really think this website needs far more attention.
    I'll probably be returning to read through more, thanks for the information!

    My website; outstanding english golden retriever information facts

    ReplyDelete
  32. I was able to find good information from your content.


    my website golden retriever lab mix breeders

    ReplyDelete
  33. Todаy, I went to the beachfront wіth my childrеn.
    I found a sea shеll and gaѵe it to mу
    4 уear olԁ daughter аnd sаid "You can hear the ocean if you put this to your ear." Shе placeԁ the shell to her ear and screamed.
    There waѕ a hеrmit сrаb insiԁe
    and it pinched her ear. She neveг wants to gо back!
    LoL I κnow this іѕ totally off tорic but
    I had to tell someone!

    Ϻу weblog Chemietoilette

    ReplyDelete
  34. Your style is very unique in comparison to other folks I've read stuff from. Thanks for posting when you have the opportunity, Guess I will just bookmark this blog.

    Also visit my website - quality potty training golden retriever puppies facts

    ReplyDelete
  35. Fantastic beat ! Ι wοuld like to aρpгеntice while you
    amеnd your ωеbsite, how cοuld i subscrіbе
    for a weblog ωеb ѕite? The account hеlped me a appropriate dеаl.
    I havе bеen tiny bit асquainted of this your
    broaԁcast offeгed brіlliant clеar сoncept

    my webраge - Daniel Chavez Moran

    ReplyDelete
  36. Hi there! I'm at work surfing around your blog from my new iphone! Just wanted to say I love reading your blog and look forward to all your posts! Keep up the great work!

    My weblog :: vertical jump workouts

    ReplyDelete
  37. Hello There. I found your blog using msn.
    This is an extremely well written article. I will make sure to bookmark
    it and come back to read more of your useful info. Thanks for the post.
    I'll certainly return.

    My web-site: graduate certificate programs online

    ReplyDelete
  38. bookmarked!!, I really like your blog!

    My homepage; workouts for vertical leap

    ReplyDelete
  39. It's amazing to go to see this web site and reading the views of all mates on the topic of this paragraph, while I am also keen of getting knowledge.

    my blog post - exercises to improve vertical

    ReplyDelete
  40. Hi there, I enjoy reading through your article post. I like to write
    a little comment to support you.

    Here is my homepage :: workouts to increase vertical jump

    ReplyDelete
  41. Yes! Finally something about chesapeake bay retriever.



    Also visit my site - handy golden retriever lab mix breeders material

    ReplyDelete
  42. Howdy just wanted to give you a brief heads up and let
    you know a few of the pictures aren't loading correctly. I'm not sure why but I think its a linking issue.
    I've tried it in two different browsers and both show the same outcome.

    My web blog ... more labradoodle vs goldendoodle content

    ReplyDelete
  43. I have to thank you for the efforts you've put in writing this website. I am hoping to see the same high-grade content by you in the future as well. In fact, your creative writing abilities has inspired me to get my own, personal site now ;)

    Also visit my web site impressive Golden retriever poodle stuff

    ReplyDelete
  44. I comment each time I especially enjoy a article on
    a website or I have something to contribute to the discussion.
    Usually it's caused by the fire communicated in the article I read. And after this article "Car Rental tax". I was excited enough to post a leave a responsea response ;) I actually do have 2 questions for you if it's okay.
    Could it be only me or does it give the impression like some of these responses look as if they are coming from
    brain dead folks? :-P And, if you are posting on other places, I'd like to keep up with you. Would you list the complete urls of all your social pages like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?

    my web page - click for golden retriever character facts

    ReplyDelete
  45. Whats up are using Wordpress for your blog platform?
    I'm new to the blog world but I'm trying to get started and
    create my own. Do you require any coding knowledge to make your own blog?

    Any help would be really appreciated!

    Here is my website - Visit This Link

    ReplyDelete
  46. I'm amazed, I have to admit. Rarely do I come across a blog that's both
    educative and amusing, and without a doubt, you've hit the nail on the head. The issue is something that not enough people are speaking intelligently about. I'm
    very happy I found this in my hunt for something relating to this.



    my page: Read Full Report

    ReplyDelete
  47. Have you ever сοnsiderеd publishіng
    an e-book or guest аuthorіng on othеr blogs?
    I have a blog сenterеd on the ѕame іdeas уou discusѕ and
    ωould love to haѵe you share ѕοme stοries/informаtion.

    І know my viеwers would enjοу yοur worκ.
    If you're even remotely interested, feel free to shoot me an email.

    Also visit my website ... Private Blog network

    ReplyDelete
  48. I am extremely impressed with your writing skills as well as
    with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid theme
    or did you modify it yourself? Anyway keep up the nice quality writing,
    it's rare to see a great blog like this one nowadays.

    Have a look at my webpage: awesome golden retriever and dachshund mix tips

    ReplyDelete
  49. Hello, i think that i saw you visited my web site thus i came to “return the favor”.
    I am attempting to find things to enhance my site!I suppose its ok to use a few of
    your ideas!!

    Visit my site helpful golden retriever and lab mix information

    ReplyDelete
  50. Hello, after reading this awesome article i am as well delighted to share my experience here with
    mates.

    Here is my homepage ... golden retriever lab mix puppy

    ReplyDelete
  51. Hello there, You've done a fantastic job. I'll definitely digg it and personally recommend to
    my friends. I am sure they'll be benefited from this web site.

    Here is my site; Abercrombie and Fitch

    ReplyDelete
  52. Can I simply just say what a comfort to discover someone that actually
    understands what they're talking about on the web. You definitely realize how to bring an issue to light and make it important. More people have to read this and understand this side of the story. It's surprising you are not more popular since
    you definitely possess the gift.

    Feel free to surf to my blog post; Discover More

    ReplyDelete
  53. Right here is the perfect site for anyone who wants to find out about this topic.
    You know a whole lot its almost hard to argue with
    you (not that I personally would want to…HaHa).
    You definitely put a new spin on a subject that's been written about for ages. Great stuff, just wonderful!

    my web blog; Air Jordan Femme

    ReplyDelete
  54. Hey there, my name is Jody and I'm a fellow blogger out of Nantes, France. I like what you guys are up to. There's no doubt that Blogger: Passive Activities and Other
    Oxymorons is an example of intelligent work and reporting.
    Keep up the great work guys: I’ve incorporated you guys to my
    blogroll. I think it will improve the value of my web site.


    my blog post: interest rates on mortgages

    ReplyDelete
  55. Hello i am kavin, its my first time to commenting anywhere, when i read
    this piece of writing i thought i could also make comment due to this sensible
    piece of writing.

    Visit my website ... yellow lab golden retriever mix

    ReplyDelete
  56. Hi, Neat post. There is a problem with your site
    in internet explorer, might check this? IE still is the marketplace chief and a
    big component of other folks will leave out your great writing due to this problem.


    Here is my web site: Useful Source

    ReplyDelete
  57. I do not even know how I ended up here, but I thought this
    post was great. I do not know who you are but certainly you are going to a famous blogger if you are not already ;) Cheers!


    Here is my web blog - Important Link

    ReplyDelete
  58. Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as
    though you relied on the video to make your point. You clearly
    know what youre talking about, why throw away your
    intelligence on just posting videos to your weblog when you could
    be giving us something informative to read?

    Also visit my web-site :: click for House training a golden retriever tips

    ReplyDelete
  59. Hi there, just became alert to your blog through Google,
    and found that it is truly informative. I am gonna watch out for brussels.

    I'll appreciate if you continue this in future. Lots of people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

    my web-site - Beil

    ReplyDelete
  60. My family members every time say that I am killing my time here at web, however
    I know I am getting familiarity every day by reading such good articles.


    Here is my page :: calculate waist to height ratio

    ReplyDelete
  61. A fascinating discussion is definitely worth comment.
    There's no doubt that that you need to publish more on this subject matter, it may not be a taboo subject but usually people do not speak about these subjects. To the next! Cheers!!

    my homepage ... check my source

    ReplyDelete
  62. Stay away from other companies and go with mph club™ for exotic car rental miami .

    ReplyDelete