[JRyan]

I think the DOT officer from Florida is quoting off of a position statement that may have been adopted for use by their patromen. It doesn't mean that it's CORRECT. This happens quite often and I'll get back to this point later.

Florida's DOT ASSUMING "Corporate Sponsorship" just because you have a DECAL is in itself a false premis. If you were PAID to put the decal on the car, AND claim the income as an offset to expenses, then you would be involved in a Commericial Endeavor. Just having the decal on the car means absolutely nothing. If you were paid to have the decal on the car and claimed the $$$ as "ordinary income" on your tax return, you meet the criteria of the DOT regs regarding exceptions.

The problem is that every states HP's are looking for "atta boys" from their superiors who themselves don't really know the law, but only go by the position statement they've been handed.

Personal case in point. I dealt with Social Services regarding a position paper they referred to with regard to care for my father. They were adamant that the position paper was correct. Unfortunately for the State of South Dakota, it didn't follow the law. We won all 19 points of the case, and although the dollar amount we won was small, it ended up costing the State of South Dakota $2.3 MILLION in back pay to those whom they had previously slighted.

I think the State of Florida better look at the exemption part a little more closely, as well as "Corporate Sponsorship". If you never get a dime from the decal, how are you Corporate Sponsored?

Jerry