Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1948 )

NEY GENERAL.
EXAS
PRICE DANIEL
ATTORNEYGENERAL
March 22, 1948~
Hon. Lee Nowlin, Opinion No. V-523.
County Attorney,
Hale Coun%y, Re: Validity of tax assess-
Plainvhw, *Texas
* ments not acted on by
the Board of Bqualiza-
tion,
Dear Sir:
We refer to your letter of January 199 1948,
in Which you ask:
.
“Does a county have a legal remedy for
the colleceion of taxes where the Commis-
sioners’ Court failed to sit as a Board of
Equalization.*’
. *.
As we construe your question, you request an. * . .
opinion as to whether tax assessments are valid if the
Colamissioners Court of Male County failed to convene .
ai9 a Board of Equalization and act on the assessment
lists and books as provided in Artfcle 7206, V.C,S. We
are. informed that your Inquiry has reference to assess-
mrnts for the years 1945, 1946, and 1947.
As refle,cted by the Hale County tax rolls for
said years in the office of the State Comptroller, the
Assessor and Collector of Taxes placed his oath thereon
as provided in Article 7222, V, C, S.; and the Commis-
sioners’ Court of Hale County, sitting as a Board of
Equalization, placed its cert iffcat e of approval there-.
on,, in which it is certified that safd Board examfned
the assessments 9 corrected the valuations, and examined
the rolls and books made up from approved assessments,
and found the property was assessed at its true and full
value. Such, certificates are signed by the County Judge
and all of the four County Commissfoners of Hale County.
The office of Assessor and Collector of Taxes
is” created by Section 14 of Article VIII of the State
Constitution in Which it is provided that ‘I0 ., 0 such
Assessor and Collector of Taxes shall uerform all the
@ties with respect to sssessine arouertv for the pur-
pose of taxation and of collectfn% taxes as may be pre-
scribed by the Legislature,”
Hon. Lee Aowlfn - Page 2 (V-523)
Articles 718.3-7205 and 7209, 7210, 7211, V.C.S.,
prsscrlbe the powers and duties of the Assessor and Col-
lector of Taxes which include every act pertaining to list-
ing property for taxation.
Article 7211 authorizes the Assessor and Collec-
tor to fix values and provides for appeals by the property
owner to the Board of Equalization. The pertinent part of
that article reads, in parts
“Hereafter when any person, firm or cor-
poration renders his, their or its property in
this State for taxation to any tax assessor,
and makes oath as to the kind, character, qual-
ity and quantity of such property, and the said
officer accentine said rendition from such D e r -
son. firm or coruoration of such urouertv is
satisfied that it is correctly and prouerly
valued accordinn to the reasonable cash market
value of such prouertv on the market at the
tine of its rendition, he shall list the same
ccordfnzly: but, if the assessor is satisffed
that the value is below the reasonable cash
market value of such prouerty, he shall at once
aace on said rendition ovnosite each wiece of ,
property so rendered an amount eaual to the rea-
sonable cash market value of such arooertv at
the time of its rendition, and if such property
shall be ,found to have no market value by such
offfcer, then at such sum as said offis shall
deem the real or intrfnsic value of the proper-
ty; and if the uerson-lfstinz such orouertv or
the owner thereof is not satisfied with the val-
ue olaced on the aroperty bv the assessor. he
shal_lgmr a and if desiring
so to do make oath before the assessor that t&
‘valuation so fixed by said officer on said proo-
ertv is excessive; such officer to furnish such
rendition, together with his valuatfon thereon
and the oath of such person, firm or officer of
any corporation, if anv such oath has been made,
to the commissioners” court of the county in
which said rendition was made, which court shall
hear evidence and determine the true value of
such property on January First ., 0 0 .,”
Hon. Lee Nowlin - Page 3 (V-523)
Article 7222, V. C. S., requires the tax as-
sessor to swear that his tax rolls or books are correct,
and Article 7223 requires that said officer deliver such
lists and statements of property received by him to the
Board of Equalization, alphabetically arranged.
Commissioners’ Courts, sitting as Boards of
Equalization, may ascertain and equalize valuations of
property listed for taxation. Articles 7206 and 7218,
provide that such Board shall meet on the second Monday
in May of each year or as soon thereafter as practica-
ble before the first day of June, and receive all lists
or books of the assessor and see that every person has
rendered his property at a fair market value, correct
errors, equalize values and return the lists to the as-
sessor, who shall proceed to prepare his tax rolls.
Opinion No. O-6708 by a former Attorney Gener-
al construes as directory the specification in said ar-
ticles of the time when such Boards of Equalization shall
meet. A copy of that opinion is enclosed for your in-
format ion.
Article 7224 provides that the Board of Equal-
ization shall examine the rolls or assessment books and
make corrections. It reads:
“After the board of equalization shall
have examined the rolls or assessment books
and made all corrections, if any be neces-
sary, the assessor shall send one copy Of
each to the Comptroller, one copy of each
to the collector of his county? and he shall
file the other copies in the county clerk’s
office until the next assessment, when the
assessor shall have the right to withdraw
them and use as provided in this title. Id,”
Article 7225, V.C.S,, provides that ” 0 e . 0
should his rolls or books, when presented for approval
to the c*mmiss&oPers’ courr, prove to be imperfect or
erroneous, the court shall have the same corrected or
perfected, either by the assessor or some other person
than the assessor of taxes, e 0 *I’
Article 7253, R,S., 1925, provides that When.
any tax collector shall have received the assessment
Hon. Lee Noilin - Page 4 (V-523)
rolls or books of the county, he shall receipt to the
commissioners' court for the same; and said rolls or
books shall be full and sufficient authority for said
collector to receive and collect the taxes therein
levied."
Haynes v. State, 99 S. W, 405 (Error refused)
involved an assessment of unrendered real estate in
which the list was not presented to the Board of Equal-
ization. The completed tax roll was sworn to by the
assessor and was examined and approved by the Commis-
sioners' Court sitting as a Board of Equalization. The
Court said, in part:
'Were the assessments for the years 1900
and 1901 void by reason of the failure of the
assessor to list the property for those years
and present such lists to the commissioners'
court for examination, correction, and appro-
val? The defendant offered to show, and x
was agreed that if oermitted he could show,
that, for the years 1900 and 1901, the proper-
ty was not listed by the tax assessor and that
no listing of the same was submitted to the
commissionersP court sftting as a Board of
eaualizatfon. But that the lot was placed up-
on the assessorPs block books? which books
were never inspected or approved by said board,
and then entered upon the tax rolls, and that
said tax rolls were submitted to the comm%s-
sioners" court sittfng as a board of equaliza-
tion for examination, correction, and approval,
The court susta&e~an exceat&n to this evi-
pence0 The appellant cornplaIns of this action
0 0 D The tax rolls for 1900 and 1901 were pre-
sented to, and were examfned and approved by,
the commissioners" court sitting as a board of
equalization, The aarticular omission com-
glained of was the failure of the tax assess-
or to list the uroaerte -resent the list
to the board for aaorova&. 'Did thfs omission
render the assessment for the years named
void? . 0 a .
"In the case of State v. Carr (MO, Sup,)
77 S.W. 5439 it was held by the Supreme Court
of Missouri, construing the tax laws of that
State, that an omission to lfst the property
Hon. Lee Nowlin - Page 5 (V-523)
was not one of the essentials of the law gov-
erning the assessment of property for taxa-
tion; that such urovision was merely direc-
torv and not mandatory and a failure of the
assessor to make out t;e list did not vitiate
the assessment. In this state a substantial
compliance with the statute is treated as suf-
ficient to fix a lien for taxes. State v.
Farmer, 94 Tex. 235. 59 S.W. 541. It was the
duty of the owner-of~the lot to list it for
taxation. This dutv he failed to werform It
then became the dutv of the ass ssor to list
and assess the lot. He failed io list it
but it was assessed. It is not denied th&
the property was subject to taxation. It was
situated in Dallas county, and was liable for
taxation in that county, The tax assessor
had full jurisdiction over the property, It
is not alleged that the valuation placed up-
on the property by the assessor, and which
the board of equalization approved, was not
its true taxable value, It is not denied
that the tax assessed against the lot is its
proper share of taxes for the years named,
Appellant fails to show that he has been In-
jured by the failure of the assessor to list
the lot, We are of the opinion that the pro-
vision in the statute imposing the duty on
the assessor to list the property is dfrec-
w, and that, in order for the taxpayer to
take advantage of such failure, he must show
that he has suffered-Lthe omfssfon. State
v. Carr.
- ``~ suura, Cftv of Rockland vO Ulmer,
supra, O O At the end of the roil was a prop-
er certificate of the assessor, as required
by the statute, showing, among other things,
'that the rolls to which this is attached
contains a correct and full lfst of the real
and personal property subject to taxation in
Dallas count~$~ etc. This certificate was
sworn to by the assessor and the rolls were
examined and approved by the board of equal-
ization D O O There was no error in exclud-
ing the evidence." (Emphasfs added)
We are of the opfnfon that failure of the Com-
missionerst Court to convene as a Board of Equalfzation
.
Hon. Lee Nowlin - Page 6 (V-523)
does not affect the validity of tax assessments if the
completed tax roll is sworn to by the tax assessor and
examined and approved by the Commissioners' Court, sit-
ting as a Board of Equalization.after completion. We
are also of the opinion that the usual procedure is a-
vailable to enforce payment of the taxes shown on such
approved tax rolls,
SUMMARY
Tax rolls and books prepared by and
sworn~to by the Assessor and Collector as
being correct which are subsequently exam-
ined, corrected, and approved by the Com-
missioners' Court sitting as a Board of
Equalization, are valid, notwithstanding
failure of the CommissionersD Court to
convene as a Board of Equalization as pro-
vided in Article 7206 Va. C. S.
Yours very truly,
ATTORNEY
GENERALOF TEXAS
WTW:wb " W, 'I;, W%iliams
Encl. Asststant
ATTORNEYGENERAL