In re Tax Appeal of Travelocity.Com., L.P. v. Director of Taxation
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAP-13-0002896 02-APR-2015 08:36 AM SCAP-13-0002896 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I In the Matter of the Tax Appeal of TRAVELOCITY.COM, L.P., Petitioners and Respondents/Appellees-Cross-Appellants, vs. DIRECTOR OF TAXATION, STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondent and Petitioner/Appellant-Cross-Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (T.A. NO. 11-1-0021 AND CONSOLIDATED CASES: 11-1-0022, 11-1-0023, 11-1-0026, 11-1-0027, 11-1-0029, 11-1-0030, 11-1-0031, 11-1-0032, 11-1-0033, 12-1-0287, 12-1-0288, 12-1-0289, 12-1-0292, 12-1-0293, 12-1-0294, 12-1-0295, 12-1-0297, 12-1-0299, and 12-1-0300) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ., and Circuit Judge Lee, in place of Acoba, J., recused) Upon consideration of Respondent and Petitioner/Appellant-Cross-Appellee Director of Taxation’s motion for reconsideration, filed on March 27, 2015, the papers in support, and the records and files herein, it does not appear that this court has overlooked or misapprehended points of law or fact. See Dir. of Taxation v. Med. Underwriters of Cal., 115 Hawai i 180, 194-95, 166 P.3d 353, 367-68 (2007) (authorization of taxpayer to transact business under a registration statute does not inform the question as to taxpayer’s tax liability). 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is denied. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, April 2, 2015. Douglas S. Chin, Hugh R. Jones, Girard D. Lau, Kimberly Tsumoto Guidry, Warren Price, III, Kenneth T. Okamoto, Robert A. Marks, Gary Cruciani, and Steven D. Wolens for Director of Taxation, State of Hawai i /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Randal K.O. Lee Paul Alston, Pamela W. Bunn, and Ronald I. Heller for Travelocity.com, et al. 1 As stated by the Director of Taxation in its answering brief regarding the General Excise Tax claims, “[S]tatutory construction questions pertaining to regulation of businesses are separate from questions pertaining to whether their revenues should be taxed.” (Citing Med. Underwriters of Cal., 115 Hawai i at 194-95, 166 P.3d at 367-68). We further note that the Director of Taxation contended that “the OTCs improperly rel[ied]” upon the same definition of “travel agency” that the Director of Taxation directs this court to rely on in the motion for reconsideration. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
