Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1957 )

THEA~ORNEYGENE~RAL
OF TEXAS
April 23, 1957
Eon. Rollie Steakleg opinion Ro. WV 106
Secretary of State
Capitol Station Re: Whether or not the Lover
Auatln, Texas Rio Qrande Valley Chamber
of Commerce is exempt iron
the payment of franchise
taxes under the RrovLsieas
of Article 7094, Revised
Dear Mr. SteakleY: Civil Statutes.
Your letter requests our opinion aa tomwhether
the Lover Rio Wanda ValleY~Chamber of Commerce; a cor-
portatlon, is exempt from payment of'the franchise tax
under Article 7094, Revised Civil Statutes. Your letter
states in Dart:
"It is requested that you review this
question In the light of Opinion Ro.
o-7240 (1946) and In consideration of
the followinga Regional Chambers of
eommetie~deal prlmarllY with cities
and,towns In their respective areas;
to tax~regional and county Chambers of
Commerce while exempting Chambers of
Commerce organized lor,promoting th6
public Interest of a particular city or
town would, perhaps raise a question
of discrimination.
"This offlce has construed Opinion Ro.
O-7240 to the effect that all regional
and county Chambers of Commerce are aub-
jeot to payment of the franchise tax."
Article 7094, inter alla, exempts from payment
of the franchise tax corporations vithout capital stock
"organized for the exclusive purpose of promoting the
public Interest of any city or town."
In opinion lo. O-7240, this office stated:
'We interpret this language to mean that the organi-
zation must be for the exolusive purpose of promoting
Eon. Zollle Steakley Page 2 Opinion Ro. 106
the public Interest. of a particular city or town, and not
one designed, as obviously the Rusk County Chamber of Ccm-
merce is, to promote the public interest of the county
as a whole.”
We think said opinion properly interpreted the
language of the exemptlon statute. The charter of the
corporationinvolved in your Inquiry states that Its
purpose Is “to acquire, preserve and disseminate valuable
business 1nfoPmation for and generally to promote the
lnterast of trade and increase the facilities of commer-
clal transactions In the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas .”
We have no doubt that such company is a regional chamber
of commePce, designed to promote the business welfare of
the entlr% Lower Rio Qrande Valley. As such it, like a
county chamber of commePce, falls to come within the
statute ex%mptlng corporations whose exclusive puPpose
is to promote the ,publlc inter%& of any city or town.
On the question of dFscrlmin%tlon, weerefer ‘,..
you to suoh cases as State v. Southwestern aas and Electric
Company, 145 Tex. 24, 193 S .W. 2d 675 (1946) and Texas
Company v. Stephens, 100 Tex. 628, 103 S.W.~481 (1907),
which Beal with the paver of the L%glslatur% to classify
the subjects of, taxcttion. FOP the’ puPpose, of an%wePLng
your InqulPy, how%v%r, we do not find It neoeaeary to
pass on whether Article 7094 Is dlscririnatory.~ Rven
if we h%ld the statute dlscrlminatorg and unconstltution-
al, this would only invalidate th% ex%mption insofar
as othe~r companies aP% concerned. It would ‘not wPite
new exerptloasinto the law and would not alter~the tax
llabllity of county and regional chambers. The matter
of ,whether the classification mad~ein the statute
operates unfairly against county and regloaal chambers
as compared with city or tovn chambers is one that must
be addressed to the Legislature. We can only interpret
the law as that body has written it.
. .
. . .
Hon. Zollie Steakley Page 3 Opinion 106
SUMMARY
The Lower Rio Orande Valley Chamber of Com-
merce, being a feglonal chamber of commerce
.and not one that is "organized for the ex-
clusive purpose of promoting the public
interest of any city or town," is not
exempt from payment of franchise taxes
under Article 7094, R.C.S.
Very truly yours
WILL WIISolp
Attorney General of Texas
APPROVED:
OPIIIOH COMMITTEE;
B. @rady Chandler, Chairman
J. C. Davis, Jr.
John Ross Lennan
Wllllam E. Allen
REVIEWED
FOR THE ATTORWEY
GEHERAL
By: Qeo. P. Blackburn