Kanakuk-Kanakomo Kamps, Inc. v. Director of Revenue

8 S.W.3d 94, 1999 Mo. LEXIS 70, 1999 WL 1128259
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedDecember 7, 1999
DocketNo. SC 81365
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 8 S.W.3d 94 (Kanakuk-Kanakomo Kamps, Inc. v. Director of Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kanakuk-Kanakomo Kamps, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 8 S.W.3d 94, 1999 Mo. LEXIS 70, 1999 WL 1128259 (Mo. 1999).

Opinions

JOHN C. HOLSTEIN, Judge.

Kanakuk-Kanakomo Kamps, Inc., (Kanakuk) appeals the decision of the Administrative Hearing Commission (AHC) finding it a place of “recreation, games and athletic events” within the meaning of sec. 144.020.1(2)1 and, therefore, subject to sales tax. Since this case requires the construction of revenue laws, this Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction. Mo. Const, art. V, sec. 3. The decision of the AHC is affirmed.

This Court’s review of the AHC’s decision is limited. The AHC’s decision shall be upheld when authorized by law and supported by competent and substantial evidence upon the whole record. Sec. 621.193; see also Mo. Const. art. V, sec. 18. Moreover, the evidence is viewed in a light most favorable to the decision, together with all reasonable inferences that support it. Shell Oil Co. v. Director of Revenue, 732 S.W.2d 178, 180 (Mo. banc 1987). Viewed in this light, the facts are as follows:

Kanakuk is a Texas corporation with a principal place of business in Branson, Missouri. Kanakuk operates five summer camps in Taney and Stone Counties for youths ranging from age 8 to 18. Both boys and girls attend the camps, although they stay in segregated quarters on opposite sides of the facilities. Approximately 9,500 campers stay at Kanakuk each summer. Each can sign up for stays of 7, 14, or 26 days for which all but a few underprivileged children pay a tuition fee.2 The camps offer children athletic activities and attempt to inculcate Christian faith and [96]*96values at the same time.3 The activities Kanakuk offers include: football, soccer, basketball, baseball, tennis, kayaking, archery, fishing, golf, karate, mountain biking, riflery, track and field, volleyball, weight training, wilderness camping, wrestling, gymnastics, cheerleading, dance, fitness and nutrition, nature and leather craft activities, water slides, the blob,4 water zipline,5 jet ski, water trolley, canoeing, diving, sailing, swimming, wind surfing, frisbee, ultimate frisbee, frisbee golf, aerial tennis, cross country, adventure games, wall climbing, juggling, rappelling, ropes, challenge courses, pottery, crafts, barn swing, warball, musical and dramatic presentations, putt-putt, and washers.6

These activities are tightly scheduled and highly structured. Campers get to choose a sport that becomes their specialty activity, such as football, soccer, or basketball. The older children spend more time engaging in this specialty activity due to increased ability to concentrate. In addition to this “major” sport, children may participate in sessions focusing on “minor” events as well as some free time to select from a number of activities of their choosing with instructor supervision. Each of the activities at Kanakuk is designed to teach Christian principles in addition to improving athletic skills. In the evening, more time is set aside for Christian teaching in addition to the scheduled morning and evening devotional periods.

Kanakuk instructors and counselors are typically student athletes in college or have just completed high school. The camp seeks to hire staff with athletic abilities, and admits it cannot really use employees lacking athletic abilities. Kanakuk insists that each of them be a committed Christian. However, the greatest emphasis is on athletic abilities and experience. Since the staff eats, sleeps, and works around and with children, Kanakuk tries to employ people who also love children. Instructors are provided with clinic handbooks for each specialty sport, which outline drills and techniques to practice the various sports, daily Bible verses, and allocate time to specific drills, competition, or exercise.

Section 144.020.1(2) imposes sales tax on fees paid in or to any place of “amusement, entertainment or recreation, games and athletic events.” Laws imposing taxes are to be strictly construed, and so the right to tax must be conferred by plain language, for it will not be extended by implication. Blue Springs Bowl v. Spradling, 551 S.W.2d 596, 599 (Mo. banc 1977). The plain language of the statute makes it clear that Kanakuk, if it is to be taxed, must be a place of “recreation, games and athletic events.” Where there is uncertainty as to the application of these statutory words, this Court’s recent decision in Columbia Athletic Club v. Director of Revenue, 961 S.W.2d 806 (Mo. banc 1998), offers guidance.

[I]n the context of section 144.020.1(2), a place of recreation is a building or locality that has as its special purpose, the facilitation of diversion or entertainment. The focus of the analysis, when applying section 144.020.1(2), is necessarily on that special purpose, or more accurately, on the primary purpose of the facility involved. If the primary purpose of the facility is to facilitate diversion or entertainment, then the facility is a place of recreation and is subject to assessment of sales tax....

Id. at 809-10 (emphasis original). There is no uncertainty as to the applicability of the statutory language to the activities here and, thus, no real need to engage in a painstaking effort to discern the facilities’ primary purpose. Kanakuk fails to show [97]*97how its activities are outside the statutory-taxing language even under the “primary purpose” test.

In seeking to determine the primary purpose of the athletic club’s facility in Columbia Athletic Club, this Court identified the dual nature of exercise. Id. at 810. Specifically, since the fitness center facilitated exercise, this Court had to determine whether exercise, having both recreational and health-related aspects, can be considered recreation under sec. 144.020.1(2). Id. In ascertaining the primary purpose of a facility displaying a dual nature, one recreational and one non-recreational, a court must consider how the facility is viewed within normal contemplation. Id. Clearly, this requires an objective analysis of the nature of a facility. The Court discounted the subjective reasons any individual may have for using a facility. Id. Columbia Athletic Club recognized that certain sports are “commonly viewed” or “traditionally considered” recreational activities. Among these were racquetball, tennis, swimming, and basketball. Id. at 810-11.

Kanakuk does not dispute that the games and sports engaged in by campers at its facilities are commonly viewed as recreational. Viewed objectively, that should be sufficient to support the AHC’s findings that the sports activities are recreational. However, in its point relied on, Kanakuk asserts it is not recreational because its primary purpose is “training, instruction and lessons in sports activities.”

Exhibits in the record include the list of sports and activities offered at the camps, as listed above. In these lists, no mention is made of instruction or lessons.

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

Related

Randall Gene Looney, II v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2018
Office of the Public Counsel v. Missouri Public Service Commission
409 S.W.3d 371 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 2013)
Michael Jaudes Fitness Edge, Inc. v. Director of Revenue
248 S.W.3d 606 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 2008)
Wilson's Total Fitness Center, Inc. v. Director of Revenue
38 S.W.3d 424 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 2001)
Bolivar Road News, Inc. v. Director of Revenue
13 S.W.3d 297 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 S.W.3d 94, 1999 Mo. LEXIS 70, 1999 WL 1128259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kanakuk-kanakomo-kamps-inc-v-director-of-revenue-mo-1999.