Greenwood Gaming & Entertainment, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Revenue

22 A.3d 286, 2011 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 223, 2011 WL 1706971
CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 5, 2011
Docket796 M.D. 2010
StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.3d 286 (Greenwood Gaming & Entertainment, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Greenwood Gaming & Entertainment, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Revenue, 22 A.3d 286, 2011 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 223, 2011 WL 1706971 (Pa. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

*287 OPINION BY

President Judge LEADBETTER.

Presently before this court in its original jurisdiction is the preliminary objection (demurrer) of the Commonwealth, Department of Revenue, to the petition for review filed by Greenwood Gaming and Entertainment, Inc., seeking relief in the nature of a declaratory judgment. Specifically, Greenwood seeks a declaration that the tax rate imposed pursuant to 4 Pa.C.S. § 13A62 on the daily gross table game revenue from fully automated electronic gaming tables is 34% rather than the 48% sought by the Department. This issue, which requires construction of the recently enacted statutory provision, is one of first impression.

Prior to setting forth the underlying facts, we note that the 2010 amendments to the Pennsylvania Race Horse Development and Gaming Act (Act), 1 authorized the commencement of table game operations, including fully automated electronic gaming tables [EGTs] 2 that allow patrons to play table games without the participation of a live dealer. As noted in Section 1102, the General Assembly authorized the operation of table games in order to “supplement slot machine gaming by increasing revenues to the Commonwealth and providing new employment opportunities by creating skilled jobs for individuals related to the conduct of table games at licensed facilities.... ” 4 Pa.C.S. § 1103(2.1). The General Assembly also noted that the authorization of limited gaming was intended to “provide a significant source of new revenue to the Commonwealth to support property tax relief, wage tax reduction, economic development opportunities and other similar initiatives.” Id. at subsection (3). In addition to a onetime nonrefundable authorization fee (see Section 13A61, 4 Pa.C.S. § 13A61) and local share assessments (see Section 13A63, 4 Pa.C.S. § 13A63), the Act imposes a tax on the daily gross table game revenue. Section 13A62 provides in pertinent part:

(a) Imposition.—

(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), each certificate holder shall report to the department and pay from its daily gross table game revenue, on a form and in the manner prescribed by the department, a tax of 12% of its daily gross table game revenue.
(2) In addition to the tax payable under paragraph (1), each certificate holder shall report to the department and pay from its daily gross table game revenue, on a form and in the manner prescribed by the department, a tax of 34% of its daily gross table game revenue from each table game played on a fully automated electronic gaming table.
*288 (3) The tax reported and payable under paragraph (1) by each certificate holder shall be 14% of daily gross table game revenue for a period of two years following commencement of table games operations at its licensed facility.

4 Pa.C.S. § 13A62(a) (emphasis added).

Turning to the matter presently before us, according to the petition for review, Greenwood owns and operates a casino, Parx Casino, pursuant to a slot operator license issued by the Gaming Control Board (Board). The casino currently offers 3465 slot machines and 57 live table games (ie., with a dealer) and plans to add 23 fully automated EGTs upon the Board’s approval. The fully automated EGTs will allow patrons to play blackjack, three card poker, and other games in a completely electronic setting without a dealer. The electronic games can qualify as either fully automated EGTs or slot machines depending on the software installed. The petition further avers that:

When operated so as to qualify as [fully automated] EGTs ... the electronic blackjack and poker games produce a gross revenue to the casino (ie., before costs and taxes) known as the “hold,” that is significantly less than the hold when those same electronic blackjack and poker games are operated so as to qualify as slot machines.
When operated so as to qualify as slot machines, the same electronic [games] are subject to a total tax of approximately 55%.

Petition for Review, ¶¶ 23, 24.

The Department notified Greenwood that the tax rate of 48% would apply to the “daily gross table game revenue” generated by fully automated EGTs. 3 Believing that the tax rate imposed on the daily gross table game revenue generated by fully automated EGTs under 4 Pa.C.S. § 13A62 is only 34%, Greenwood commenced the instant action seeking a declaration to that effect. In support of its position, Greenwood attached to its petition legislative history, legislative debate and a fiscal note accompanying a conference committee report. 4 The Department *289 filed a preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer, contending that the statute clearly imposes a tax rate of 48%: “The statute clearly requires a tax rate of 34% on daily gross table game revenue from each table game played on a fully automated electronic gaming table ‘in addition to’ the base tax rate, which the statute clearly sets at 14% for the first two years of operation.” Preliminary Objection, ¶ 16.

In its brief in support of its preliminary objection, the Department reiterates its position that Section 13A62 is clear and unambiguous, rendering consideration of other possible indicia of legislative intent unnecessary and improper. The Department contends as follows:

The language of 4 Pa.C.S. § 1362A(a)(l) [sic][ 5 ] establishes in plain language that a tax rate of 12% shall apply, except as modified in paragraphs (2) and (3). Paragraph (3) modifies the first paragraph to the extent that a certificate holder, such as Greenwood, is within the first two years of its table game operations. As such, the baseline tax rate is 14%. 4 Pa.C.S. § 1362A(a)(3) [sic]. Paragraph (2) states in clear language that, “[i]n addition to the tax payable under paragraph (1), each certificate holder shall report to the department and pay from its daily gross table game revenue ... a tax of 34% of its daily gross table game revenue from each table game played on a fully automated electronic gaming table.” 4 Pa.C.S. § 1362A(a)(2) [sic] (emphasis added). Accordingly, the plain language of this statute requires that the tax rate applicable to fully automated electronic gaming tables, which are within the first two years of operation, be calculated by adding 14% and 34%. Thus, the tax rate of 48% that was determined by the Department of Revenue was correct....

Department’s brief at 9 (footnote added).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

§ 1103
Pennsylvania § 1103
§ 1362A
Pennsylvania § 1362A(a)(l)
§ 13A
Pennsylvania § 13A
§ 1403
Pennsylvania § 1403(b)
§ 1921
Pennsylvania § 1921

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 A.3d 286, 2011 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 223, 2011 WL 1706971, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenwood-gaming-entertainment-inc-v-commonwealth-department-of-pacommwct-2011.