Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1950 )

THE A NERAL
TEXAS
January 18, 1950
Hon. Robert S. Calvert Opinion No. V-983.
Comptroller of Public Accounts
Austin, Texas Re: The source of the fees due
the Tax Assessor-Collec-
tor of Cameron County for
asse,ssing State ad valorem
taxes, since the entire tax
is now remitted to Cameron
County.
Dear Mr. Calvert:
You request the opinion of this office upon the questions
presented in your letter of December 22, 1949, which we quote in
full as follows:
“Since approximately 1925 Cameron County has
operated under a State Tax remission bill, and through-
out each and every year of such period, the State of
Texas has paid to the Tax Assessor-Collector of Cam-
eron County, one-half of the fees provided by Article
3937 for the assessment of State taxes.
‘“Prior to the enactment of House Bill No. 779,
as passed by the 51st Legislature, there had been a
percentage of the State ad valorem tax not remitted to
Cameron County, and a sufficient amount of monies
were collected ,under this percentage to pay the fees
due the Assessor-Collector provided by Article 3937
for the assessment of State taxes. House Bill No. 779,
as passed by the 51st Legislature, remits or grants
the entire State ad valorem taxes levied to Cameron
County,
‘“Since there is no levy under which one-half of
the fees provided by Article 3937 for the assessment
of State taxes (all taxes levied and collected in said
,Cameron County have been donated under H. B. 779).
this Department wrote the following letter to the Book-
keeper of the Ad Valorem tax Division under date of
Dec. 15th, 1949.
Hon. Robert S. Calvert. Page 2 (V-983)
” ‘The regular session of the 51st Legislature
passed House Bill 779 donating to Cameron County the
.lO$ general revenue State taxes to be assessed and
collected for the years 1949 and 1950, which amount,
together with the general revenue taxes which previous-
ly had been donated to the County by the Legislature
will give the County all of the general revenue tax.
“ ‘Article 3937, Revised Civil Statutes provides
that the commission due the County Tax Assessor-Col-
lector for assessing the taxes each year shall be paid
one half by the State and one half by the County out of
the,taxes collected from the assessment roll. The gen-
eral revenue part of the commission due C. H. Holcomb,
Tax Assessor-Collector of Cameron County, for the
‘year 1949, in accordance with the general revenue tax
levy of .30$ equals $2,351.07. Since the County is re-
ceiving all of the general revenue taxes as a donation,
they should pay the $2,351.07 in accordance with Attor-
ney General’s Opinions No. 02 and 050. written Feb. 8,
1939 to’Hon. Geo. H. Sheppard Comptroller ,of Public
Accounts AndyHon. Jack~W,iech, County Attorney, Browns-
ville, Texas.
” “You are, therefore, directed. to charge by spe-
cial entry the 1949 account of G. H. Holcomb, Tax As-
sessor-Collector of Cameron County. ‘with the sum of
$2.351.07. crediting a like amount to the Tax Account.
File this letter with the Cameron County 1949 account
papers.’
“The County Attorney of Cameron County has ques-
tioned the correctness of the instructions in the above
letter, and he has requested this department to review
our letter, and re-instruct our Bookkeeper to give cred-
it to the Tax Assessor-Collector, of Cameron County,
for the full one-half of the’fees due for assessing the
State taxes under the provisions of Article 3937 R.C.S.
“I shall, therefore, thank you to advise this depart-
ment whether all the fees due the Tax Assessor-Collec-
tor, of Cameron County, under Art. 3937, for assessing
the State taxes are chargeable against the monies col-
lected for School and Confederate Pension purposes? It
has been our construction that each Fund should bear
it’s prorata part of the compensation due the Assessor-
Collector under Art. 3937; however, I refer you to Opin-
ions Nos. O-2; and O-50 written by your Department un-
der date of Feb. 8, 1939, and addressed to Hon. Gee. H.
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 3 (V-983)
Sheppard. State Comptroller, and Hon. Jack Wiech,
County Attorney of Cameron Coupty. I am also enclos-
ing a copy of a letter addressed to this department.
dated Dec. 19. 1949, by the County Attorney of Cam-
eron County.
“There is no litigation pending that would deter-
mine the questions submitted herein.”
By way of historical background we will review brief-
ly the original remission act of the Legislature passed in 1925. and
subsequent amendments thereto, applicable to Cameron County.
The original act is Senate Bill No. 417, Acts 39th Leg.. R.S. 1925,
ch. 35, pm 161. This original act remitted to Cameron County for
the purposes and under the conditions specified therein that part of
the State ad valorem general revenue taxes in excess of IO{ on the
$100 valuation of property subject to taxation, collected upon prop-
erty and from persons in the County of Cameron, including the roll-
ing stock belonging to railroad companies ascertained and appor-
tioned as provided by law. The result of this original bill was to
donate to’cameron County two-thirds of the 30$ on the $100 valua-
tion levied for State general revenue, thus leaving one-third of the
30$ to be retained by the State. The 1947 amendment, Acts 50th
Leg., R.S. 1947, ch. 457, p. 1071, did not increase or decrease this
remission to Cameron County, but subdivision (r) of Section l-a,
H. B. 779, Acts Slst Leg,. R,S. 1949. ch. 309, p. 572, donated the
remainder of the lO$ on the $100 valuation to the County.
Article 3937, V.C.S.. provides, in part:
“Each Assessor of Taxes shall receive the fol-
lowing compensation for his services, which shall be
estimated on the total value of the property assessed,
as follows: 0 . s . one-half of the above compensation
shall be paid by the State and one-half by the county
1
0 D*
Since the State had at all times prior to the enactment
of H. B. 779. supra, retained one-third or lO$ on the $100 valua-
tion of the property covered by the original remission bill and a-
mendments thereto, the State’s part of the cost of assessing the
taxes in Cameron County was in actual practice, and as a matter
of accounting, charged against the one-third or lO$ retained by the
State.
We do not think that it was the intention of the Legisla-
ture to make the remission in the original act or any amendments
thereto free of the cost of assessing and collecting the taxes. Here-
tofore it made no difference whether the State compensated the as-
sessor for assessing the State’s part of the taxes by charging the
Hon. Robert S. Calvert,‘Page 4 (V-983)
same against the entire State levy of 3Od or the remaining lO# on
the $100 valuation, since the latter was sufficient at all times to
fully compensate the assessor’for the State’s one-half of the cost
of assessing. We do not now conaider whether the prior procedure
in handling this matter was proper. When the original act was
passed as to Cameron County in 1925, Article 3871, V.C.S., now
Article 3937, was the same as now except for subsequent minor a-
mendments changing the basic figur’es, of computation upon a grad-
uated scale of valuations. When the Legislature enacted this re-
mission act applicable to Cameron County, it knew that the general
law (Art. 3937, V.C.S.) provided for the commission or compensa-
tion to the tax assessor forassessing State and county taxes. and
that it required the State and county to share the cost equally. No
change in this statutor’y requirement was made or intended to be
made by the Legislature in the enactment of the Cameron County
remission bill or the amendments thereto. The Legislature sure-
ly did not intend by these donations to Cameron County to reduce
the amount of the school, college and pension funds, by making these
funds pay the full amount of the tax assessor’s fees.
The methods of paying’the State’s part of the assessing
cost is provided for in Article 3938,. V.C.S., as follows:
“The Comptroller, on receipt of the rolls, shall
.pive the assessor an order on the collector of his coun-
ty for the amount due him by the State for assessing
the State taxes, to be paid out of the first money col-
lected for that year. . . 0”
This statute comprehends the assessment of the taxes
applicable to all the State funds, including the general revenue, school,
college, and pension. The tax collector, after paying the assessor
the State!6 part of the asses&g cost in the manner provided by the
foregoing ,statute, remits the balance of all State revenue to the Comp-
troller. The Comptroller in turn allocates the taxes thus collected
and remitted, charging each fund with its pro rata part of the cost,
of assessing before depositing the same in the State Treasury, to the
credit of the respective funds. The Comptroller and the Treasurer
are required by law to keep separate accounts of funds collected and
deposited. (Art. 4363, V.C.S., andArt. 4381. V.C.S.. respectively.)
As far, as ‘we are able to ascertain throughout the entire
history ,of the administretion of the fiscal affairs of the State, the
Comptroller has charged each separate fund derived from ad valo-
rem taxation the cost of the State’s part (one-half) for assessing
the State and County taxes. This charge is made upon a pro rata
basis of the total State levy. This, we think, is consistent with the
legislative intent that each separate fund bear its pro rata cost of
assessing. Such has been confirmed by long administrative practice,
-.
.
/
Hon. Robert S. Calvert. Page 5 (V-983)
presumably known to the Legislature and never in any manner
changed. Indeed, it would be an unauthorized diversion and en-
croachment upon the school, college, and pension funds, to charge
these funds with the assessing cost of the general revenue. The
fact that all the general revenue is now remitted to Cameron Coun-
ty does not make it any less general revenue, and the fund must
bear its pro rata share of the cost of assessing without reducing
or encroaching upon the other funds.
From an accounting standpoint, the method suggested
by you in your letter to Cameron County is sufficient to meet this
requirement, The fact that this results in Cameron County getting
the tax remission charged with the proportionate part of the State’s
one-half of assessing the same is not contrary to, but consistent
with what we conceive to be the legislative intent. That is, the fund
remitted by the 1949 act must still bear its proportionate share of
the State’s part of the assessing cost.
You are therefore advised that the State’s one-half of
the cost of assessing State and County taxes in Cameron County
must be charged pro rata against all State funds.
SUMMARY
The State general revenue remitted to Cameron
County by virtue of H. B. 779, Acts 51st Leg.. R.S. 1949,
ch. 309. p. 572, and by S. B. 417, Acts 39th Leg., R.S.
1925, ch. 35, p. 161, must bear its proportionate share
of the cost of assessing State and County taxes in Cam-
eron County.
APPROVED: Yours very truly,
W. V. Geppert PRICE DANIEL
Taxation Division Attorney General
Charles D, Mathews
Executive Assibt&nt
By-
LPL/mwb