No. SCWC-22-0000441, Tuesday, December 16, 2025, 9 a.m.

BOOKING.COM B.V., Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. GARY S. SUGANUMA, in his official capacity as the Director of Taxation, and STATE OF HAWAI‘I Department of Taxation, Respondents/Defendants-Appellees.

Listen to the audio recording

The above-captioned case has been set for oral argument on the merits at:

Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali ‘ iōlani Hale, 2 ^nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

The oral argument will also be livestreamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts and ‘ Ōlelo at olelo.org/tv-schedule/.

Attorney for Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant BOOKING.COM B.V.:
Nathaniel A. Higa of Chun Kerr LLP

Attorney for Respondents/Defendants-Appellees GARY S. SUGANUMA and STATE OF HAWAI‘I Department of Taxation:
Lauren K. Chun, Deputy Solicitor General

NOTE: Certificate of Recusal, by Chief Justice Mark E. Recktenwald, filed 09/23/25.

NOTE: Order assigning Circuit Judge Jeannette H. Castagnetti, in place of Recktenwald, C. J., recused, filed 09/23/25.

NOTE: Order accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 10/01/25.

COURT: McKenna, Acting C.J., Eddins, Ginoza, and Devens, JJ., and Circuit Judge Castagnetti, in place of Recktenwald, C.J., recused.

Brief Description:
The Department of Taxation promulgated Hawai ‘ i Administrative Rule § 18-237-29.53-10(a)(3) (the “Commissioned Agent Rule”), which imposed general excise taxes on on-line transient accommodations or travel-related bookings. Before any taxes from this rule were assessed against it, Booking.com sued the Department of Taxation seeking declaratory relief under Hawai ‘ i Revised Statutes (“HRS”) § 97-1, a statute governing declaratory judgment on the validity of administrative rules, that the Commissioned Agent Rule was invalid and void based on the federal Internet Tax Free Act (“ITFA”) and the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce and Supremacy Clauses. The Department of Taxation filed a motion to dismiss, arguing HRS § 632-1, a general statute governing declaratory judgments, prohibits declaratory relief “in any controversy with respect to taxes.” The circuit court and Intermediate Court of Appeals agreed and held there was no subject matter jurisdiction.

On appeal, Booking.com alleges HRS § 97-1 allows it to challenge the validity of the Commissioned Agent Rule regardless of HRS § 632-1. Booking.com contends under HRS § 97-1 an interested party is able to seek a declaration from a circuit court on the validity of all administrative rules, including those promulgated by the Department of Taxation that involve a “controversy with respect to taxes.”