Where some communities (Palm Beach County and North Palm Beach) have removed the established bulkhead lines from their ordinance Jupiter still has one.

CLICK BELOW to view and download the bulkhead lines for Jupiter.

The sale of personal property with real property happens all the time in real estate. There are typically 3 scenarios with this: 1) The items described as personal property in the Far Bar As-Is contract like the refrigerator and clothes washer and dryer are “thrown in” with the sale with no value assigned to them. 2) The Sellers sells a few personal property items (say a fancy Webber Grill they can’t take to the new condo) or the even the entire contents of the house as a bulk sale for $xx. Or, 3) Let’s pork the tax man and assign some of the agreed upon sales price to “personal property” and then we can keep the number on the deed low.

First, there is a Florida Department of Revenue Technical Dispute Resolution 18A-012 that covers this.

Let’s look at the first scenario where the Contract delineates the typical Personal Property included listed as “range(s)/oven(s), refrigerator(s), dishwasher(s), disposal, ceiling fan(s), intercom, light fixture(s), drapery rods and draperies, blinds, window treatments, smoke detector(s), garage door opener(s), security gate and other access devices, and storm shutters/panels (“Personal Property”).” Plus whatever gets written in such as wall hung TV’s. There is NO sales tax due on the transfer of these items as they are deemed to be “isolated” and “incidental” to the sale of the real property.

Scenario 2 gets slightly fuzzy as it depends on if the personal property was itemized and a separate value agreed upon or assigned to each item. If the Contract simply states something like “the contents” of the property then the answer is NO sales tax is due. However, if the items are listed out with prices agreed to for each or sold via differing bills of sale (as in a sale of boat and/or a car plus one for all the contents or the Picasso) then sales tax WOULD BE due on the sale of that personal property.

Scenario 3 (let’s pork the tax man) has one big question. Why go through the effort of something that is so pointless and may constitute one of, some of, or all of a tax, wire, mail or mortgage (if there was a loan involved) fraud. If your selling a house then why do you care if the Buyer pays a a little more real estate taxes? So you can not pay the doc stamps on the portion applied to non real property? If you’re buying then unless the house is worth north of about 5M the tax man DOES NOT look at the sale individually when assessing the market value. Values come from a mass appraisal process based upon the sales around you including yours. Are you really going to file a tax dispute and go in front of the valuation board and tell them I only paid 2M for the real estate, the other 1M was for the sofa and the Picasso. This would be FAR from something that was sold incidentally to the property. And, if the Broker received a commission on the personal property then they were involved in the sale and they were required to register as a dealer and collect the applicable sales tax.

REAL ESTATE BROKERS SHOULD REALLY THINK ABOUT THAT. THEY CAN ALLOW THE BUYER AND SELLER TO AGREE TO REDUCE THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE REAL ESTATE AND NOT COLLECT A COMMISSION ON IT BUT NO ONE LIKES THE SOUND OF THAT. OR, IF THEY COLLECT A COMMISSION AND SOMEONE TURNS THEM IN OR THE TAX MAN GET’S WISE TO IT THEN THEY MAY BE LIABLE FOR THE (now) 7% SALES TAX DUE ON THE PERSONAL PROPERTY. And good luck trying to get the Buyer or the Seller to pay the sales tax after the sale is Closed.

I quoted the following from the tax document linked to above.

“Therefore, if tangible personal property is included in the sale of the real estate and a broker is utilized, sales tax is due on the sale of the tangible personal property if it is separately itemized and separately priced apart from the sale of the real property. The status of a broker’s duty to collect and remit sales tax on certain transactions in which such brokers participates is described in Rule 12A-1.066, F.A.C. In this rule, a broker is required to register as a dealer. A broker’s participation in the sale of real estate, which sale includes tangible personal property, requires that brokers charge the applicable sales tax on the sale of such tangible personal property when the item or items of tangible personal property are separately described and the sales price of such property is separately itemized in the sales contract, bill of sale, or other similar sales document. If the tangible personal property (as in this case) is not separately described and priced apart from the real property, the transaction is considered to be a sale of real property not subject to sales tax.”

“In summary, when a real estate broker sells tangible personal property in conjunction with the sale of real property, and where such tangible items are separately described and priced apart from the price of the real property, in the sales contract, bill of sale, or other tangible evidence documenting the sale, then tax will apply to the tangible items.”

What are the “public body” special assessments that are discussed in the Far Bar As-Is paragraph 9(f)?

First, let me tell you what it is NOT. It is NOT a special assessment imposed by a Home Owners Association or by a Condominium Association. These would be covered on an HOA and/or the Condominium addendum to the contract between the parties. Generally speaking these “public body” special assessments are those imposed by say the county to pave a small road in Jupiter Farms. The easiest way to look for these, ASSUMING THEY WERE IN PLACE LAST YEAR, is to look up the tax bill on the tax collector’s website and look at the tax bill for last year and note anything unusual under the non ad valorem charges. OR, the Palm Beach Couty has a search tool as well.

And, they are NOT those imposed under chapter 190 of FS by a community development district. What are those? They are: Community development district means a local unit of special-purpose government which is created pursuant to this act and limited to the performance of those specialized functions authorized by this act; the governing head of which is a body created, organized, and constituted and authorized to function specifically as prescribed in this act for the purpose of the delivery of urban community development services; and the formation, powers, governing body, operation, duration, accountability, requirements for disclosure, and termination of which are as required by general law. CLICK HERE to see a list of “community development districts” registered in Palm Beach County. BUT CHECK the section they have been organized under. Some like the Beeline Community Development District are organized under Chapter 190. Captain’s Key is under 189.02 and others like the South Indian River Water Control District and the Northern Palm Beach County Water Improvement District were organized under Chapter 298 (so not the specifically excluded 190) of FS. Thus, this section of the Contract WOULD apply to liens imposed by them for things like road and drainage improvements.

THIS LINK talks about the method used to get a road paved in Jupiter Farms.

I had this come up on a recent sale and it caused me to look into it a bit further. The lot in question is/was properly shown on the recorded plat with the side property lines intersecting the meander line. That’s great. The survey showed that the existing sea wall (which was constructed in the mid 60’s) is landward of the meander line by about 10′ or so. So there is land between the meander line and the existing sea wall. The question is: Can one put in a new sea wall closer to the meander line and fill that area in? The answer I found out has to do with a portion of the Florida Bulkhead Act. I had previously looked at this act for the inverse of this scenario. Where the existing sea wall was built PAST or seaward the meander line.

OK, so here are the basics of it in non legal wording. Back in the late 50’s when Florida really started to boom, the location of a line where the private uplands ended and the state lands started need to be better defined. It had to do with were EXACTLY developers could bulkhead and fill in behind it. It also has to do with where munipalities coul enact local zoning ordinance as those are only applicable on their incorporated lands. The state of Florida basically said to the counties… you guys establish a bulkhead line (by ways of specific meets and bounds) near our historic meander line and the current mean high water line (supposedly) and we will approve it. Understanding that the meander line is an “about here” location of the historic mean high water line back in 1845 when Florida became a state and was suyveyed with a very low degree of certainty. This meander line separates the state owned lands below navigable waters (so called sovereign submerged lands subject to the “Public Trust Doctrin”) from the otherwise owned (by a public or private party) uplands. The meander line can move (a/k/a it’s ambulatory) so long as the movement is slow, imperceptible and not caused by human activity. But the bulkhead line, that does NOT move. So you local guys set this bulkhead line by specific meets and bounds and we, the state of Florida, will bless this new bulkhead line and make it difficult, if not impossible to get permits fill beyond it. Once established, the area landward of the bulkhea line is covered the local or county zoning ordinance. The county may, also through your local zoning, do things like ban the ability for one to build a habitable structure on piles seaward of it. Anything on piles seaward of the meander line, like a dock or a pier, is a use licensed by DEP and subject to the rules covering sovereign submerged lands.

So, where does one find information on where exactly this bulkhead line is located? Many municipalities like Riviera Beach adopted it into their local code. North Palm Beach HAD it but then repealed it because basically the new sea walls were being placed, as allowed by code, within 18″ of the old wall BUT that was beyond the established bulkhead line and DEP finally picked up on that. Remember that this is the line in the sand BUT NPB was developed right when it was set. Thus the seawall built in say 1960 was ON the bulkhead line. In Martin County, it was adopted by the county and recorded in the public records. I have yet to find a GIS layer or map of any sort that shows the local bulkhead line BUT I do have these as examples of the line in Martin County:

So, basically one can build a new sea wall out at the bulkhead line set by the county OR OTHER LOCAL MUNICIPALITY, and approved by the state. If I find the bulkhead line information for the meets and bounds of the bulkhead line in Palm Beach County I’ll add it later.

An important note here. The mere location of a bulkhead line set by the county or others locally does NOT (in my opinion) speak to the ownership of any land between the meander line and the landward existing sea wall or established bulkhead line.

I copied this from an AG opinion in regards to the “ambulatory” aspect of the meander line: “erosion or submergence is accretion in reverse, and the imperceptible principle is applicable in distinguishing erosion from avulsion. In other words, where the loss occurs through avulsion, which is defined as the sudden or violent action of the elements, and the effect and extent of which is perceptible, the boundaries do not change. But where the sea, lake, or navigable stream imperceptibly encroaches upon the land, the loss falls upon the owner, and the land thus lost by erosion returns to the ownership of the State.”