XML 26 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT  v2.3.0.11
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
 9 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2011
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]
11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Beginning January 1, 2008, the Company’s Texas clubs became subject to a new state law requiring each club to collect and pay a $5 surcharge for every club visitor.  A lawsuit was filed by the Texas Entertainment Association (“TEA”), an organization to which the Company is a member, alleging the fee amounts to be an unconstitutional tax.  On March 28, 2008, a State District Court Judge in Travis County, Texas ruled that the new state law violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is therefore invalid.  The judge’s order enjoined the State from collecting or assessing the tax.  The State appealed the Court’s ruling.  In Texas, when cities or the State give notice of appeal, it supersedes and suspends the judgment, including the injunction.  Therefore, the judgment of the District Court cannot be enforced until the appeals are completed.  Given the suspension of the judgment, the State has opted to collect the tax pending the outcome of its appeal.  On June 5, 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Third District (Austin) affirmed the District Court’s judgment that the Sexually Oriented Business (“S.O.B.”) Fee violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Attorney General of Texas has asked the Texas Supreme Court to review the case. On August 26, 2009, the Texas Supreme Court ordered both sides to submit briefs on the merits, while not yet deciding whether to grant the State’s Petition for review. The State’s brief was filed on September 25, 2009 and the Texas Entertainment Association’s brief was filed on October 15, 2009.  On February 12, 2010, the Supreme Court of Texas granted review of the Petition by the Attorney General of Texas.  Oral argument of the matter was heard on March 25, 2010.  The Company is awaiting a ruling from the Texas Supreme Court.

The Company has paid the tax for the first five calendar quarters under protest and expensed the tax in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, except for two locations in Dallas where the taxes have not been paid, but the Company is accruing and expensing the liability.  For the subsequent quarters, as a result of the Third Court’s decision, the Company accrued the fee, but did not pay the State.  As of June 30, 2011, the Company has approximately $6.1 million in accrued liabilities for this tax.  Patron tax expense amounted to approximately $691,000 and $670,000 for the quarters ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.  The Company has paid more than $2 million to the State of Texas since the inception of the tax. The Company’s Texas clubs have filed a separate lawsuit against the State to demand repayment of the taxes.  If the State’s appeal ultimately fails, the Company’s current amount paid under protest would be repaid or applied to future admission tax and other Texas state tax liabilities.