A lawsuit has been filed in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida, seeking to compel the Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR) to release public records that the agency has refused to disclose. The case arises from a public records request submitted on October 9, 2024, seeking documents and information provided to FDOR by the North Dakota Aeronautics Commission (NDAC) during the period from April 1, 2024, through September 30, 2024. Specifically, the request targeted a spreadsheet and other materials reportedly received from the NDAC containing information about aircraft and their ownership, including tail numbers (N-Numbers), serial numbers, owner names and addresses, counties, and the apparent physical location of the aircraft. The requester also sought any contractual agreements between NDAC and the Florida Department of Revenue.

The Department denied the request in writing on October 14, 2024, stating that the documents requested were confidential under section 213.053(2), Florida Statutes. According to FDOR, the information constituted “returns, reports, accounts, or declarations” received by the Department and was therefore exempt from Florida’s public records law under this statutory exemption. The Department reiterated this position in a second letter dated November 6, 2024, further asserting that the documents included investigative reports and information. The Department added that it had provided some information specific to one of the requester’s clients, but would not release any other information absent specific authorization from other affected taxpayers. The Department also warned that if the requester pursued litigation for an improper purpose, it would seek attorney’s fees under section 119.12(3), Florida Statutes.

Following FDOR’s refusal, the requester sent a formal notice under section 119.12(1)(b), Florida Statutes, providing the required five business days’ notice prior to filing suit for the recovery of attorney’s fees. When the Department maintained its denial, the requester initiated a civil action on January 23, 2025, seeking both declaratory and mandamus relief. The complaint asserts that the requested documents are not exempt from disclosure and that FDOR’s refusal to provide them violates both Florida’s Public Records Act (Chapter 119, Florida Statutes) and Article I, section 24 of the Florida Constitution, which guarantees the public’s right to access governmental records.

In its complaint, the plaintiff argues that the Department has misapplied the public records exemption in section 213.053(2)(a), Florida Statutes. The statute protects from disclosure any information contained in returns, reports, accounts, or declarations received by the Department, including investigative reports and letters of technical advice. However, the plaintiff contends that the records at issue do not fall within the scope of this exemption. According to the complaint, the documents provided by the NDAC were not filed by a taxpayer, nor were they required to be filed under Florida’s revenue laws. As such, they cannot be considered “returns” or “reports” as those terms are defined by the Department’s own administrative rule, Rule 12-22.002(4), Florida Administrative Code. That rule defines a “return” to include documents that are required to be filed by a taxpayer pursuant to Florida law.

Additionally, the plaintiff points out that section 213.053(7)(a), Florida Statutes, further confirms that the confidentiality protections apply to documents filed by persons subject to tax—again distinguishing taxpayer-submitted records from third-party records received from a government agency like NDAC. The complaint argues that interpreting section 213.053(2)(a) to include third-party records would expand the exemption far beyond its intended scope, in conflict with Florida courts’ requirement that exemptions to the Public Records Act be narrowly construed.

The complaint also challenges the Department’s characterization of the records as “investigative reports or information.” The plaintiff notes that neither section 213.053 nor chapter 119 defines these terms in a way that would include the NDAC spreadsheet. Drawing upon the definition of “criminal investigative information” from section 119.011(3)(b), Florida Statutes, the complaint asserts that to qualify, the records must be compiled in connection with an investigation of a specific act or omission. Here, the spreadsheet provided by NDAC appears to be general information collected from public sources, with no indication that it pertains to a particular investigation or a specific alleged violation.

The plaintiff also cites case law and administrative interpretation to support its position. In CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Florida Department of Revenue, a federal court interpreted the term “report” in the same statute to mean a “return” required to be filed under Florida tax laws, and thus excluded documents not submitted by a taxpayer. The plaintiff argues that the Department is bound by its own rule and relevant judicial precedent, and must interpret the statute accordingly. The complaint notes that even in other contexts within chapter 119, the term “report” typically refers to documents generated by an agency, such as crash or audit reports, not records received from outside third parties.

The legal action requests both declaratory relief and a writ of mandamus. As to the declaratory relief, the plaintiff asks the court to declare that the Department’s refusal to produce the records violates the Public Records Act, that no valid exemption applies, and that the records must be disclosed. The mandamus claim seeks to compel the Department to perform its ministerial duty to provide access to non-exempt public records. The plaintiff also invokes section 119.11, Florida Statutes, which requires courts to set immediate hearings in public records enforcement actions and give such cases priority on the docket. Lastly, the complaint requests attorney’s fees and costs under section 119.12, Florida Statutes, arguing that the Department unlawfully refused access despite receiving the statutorily required pre-suit notice.

In sum, the lawsuit represents a test of the boundaries of Florida’s public records exemptions, particularly as applied to third-party data shared between government agencies. The case raises important issues about statutory interpretation, agency discretion, and the public’s right to access information about governmental activity, particularly in the context of multi-state data sharing and tax enforcement efforts.