In
United States Satellite, the State of California imposed a five percent tax on the actual broadcast of a fight, which was assessed directly against the broadcaster or cable operator who directly transmitted the fight to the viewers. There, the court specifically noted that it was not dealing with a tax on the promoter of the fight, but a tax on the dissemination of entertainment.
Id. at 1121. In
Showtime Networks, Inc., the Georgia tax purportedly applied to boxing promoters, but the Georgia statute was so broad it encompassed distributors, broadcasters, and cable programmers, all of which were held to be protected by the First Amendment in
Turner Broadcasting. In fact Showtime, which is a cable programmer, was determined to be a promoter under the broad language of the Georgia statute. In
TVKO, the Oregon taxing statute specifically defined a promoter to include the person who has the distribution rights to a pay-per-view telecast.
Id. at 338. Unlike the California, Georgia, or Oregon statutes at issue in
United States Satellite, Showtime Networks, Inc., and
TVKO, the Florida statute clearly does not apply to a cable operator, to a distributor, or to a cable programmer.
See § 548.002, Fla. Stat. (2000).
Section 548.06 specifically applies only to a promoter.