May 1, 1962
,‘)
Mr. John T. Cox Qplnion No. WW-1322
County Attorney, Bell County
Belton, Texas Re: Liability of member Of
the Armed Forces who claims
a homestead in !bxas for
ad valorem taxes on personal
Dear Mr. Co%: property.
Your recent letter requests t&e opinion of the Attorney
Qencral of Texae in answer to your~;:lnqulry as follows:
“Would a member of the Armed Forces be
exempt from personal property tax even though
he has purchased real estate and claimed same
as homestead exemptlon,”
Our answer to your question ia that any member of the Amed
Forces who legally claims a homestead exemption from Texas ad
valorem taxes Is a “oitlzen” of thls State for all purposes of
ad valorem taxes and that all personal property owned by him and
ae defined in Article 7147 V.C,S., and which is not exempt from
such taxes by other provlslons of Texas law, 1s subject to ad
valorem taxes,
You state that the person In question has claimed a home-
stead exemption. Whether his home is legally established In
Texas 1s a question to be determined from all the relevant facts.
For purposes of this opinion we assume the person is qualified
under our state laws to claim and that he does claim a homestead
exemption to realty in this State.
The only law which must be considered in answering your
question, other than the laws of Texas relating to homesteads
and liability of citizens of this state for ad valorem taxes,
Is the following section of the Soldiers’ and Sallorsc Civil
Relief Act of 1940.
“(1) For the purposes of taxation in
respect of any person* or of hia personal
property, income, or gross ln@ke, by any
State, Territory, possession, “br; political
subdivision of any of the fore$&ng, or by
the District of Columbia, s&h person shall
not be deemed to have lost a residence or
domlclle in any State, Torrltory, possession,
.
Mr. John T. Cox, Page 2 Opinion No. ww-1322
or political subdivision of any of
the foregoing, or in the DigtAct of
Columbia, solely by reason ,of being
absent therefrom In compliance with
military or naval orders8 or to have
acquired a residence or domicile In,
or to have beoome resident In or a
resident of, any other State; Territory,
possession, or political s$bdlvlslon of
any of the foregoing, or t& District of
Columbia, while, and solel$by reason of
being, so absent. For the purposes of
taxation In respect of the:personal prop-
erty, income, or gross income of any such
person by any State, Territory, poasesslon,
or political subdlvlalon of any of the fore-
going, or the District of Columbia, of which
such person Is not a resident or In which
he la not domiciled, compensation for
military or naval service shall not be
.. deemed, income for services petiformed with- ”
In, or from sources within, such State,
Territory, possesbion, political Bubdlvlslon,
or District, and personal property ahall
not be deemed to be located or present In
or to have a sltus for taxation in such
State, Territory, posaesalon, or poli*loal
subdlvlslon, or district: Provided, That
“nothing contained In this section shall
prevent taxation by any State, Territory,
possesalon, or political subdivision of
any of the foregoing, or the District of
Columbia in respect of personal property
used In or arising from a’ trade or butilness,
If It otherwise ~has jurisdiction. This
section shall be effective as of September.8,
1939, except that It shall not requlke the
crediting or refunding of any tax paid prior
to October 6, 1942.
’(2) When used in this section, (a) the
term ‘personal property’ shall Include
tangible and fntanglble property (lnoludlng
motor vehicles), and (b) the term ttaxatlon’
shall lnolude but not be llmltad to lioenses,
feea, or excises imposed In respeot to m&or
vehiolea or the use thereof: Provided That
the license, fee8 or exclge remy the
State, Territory, poasesslq~, or District of
:,,;;
;!%
: ,:
. .
Mr. John T. Cox, Page 3 Opinion No. WW-1322
Colmbla of which the person Is a resident
or in which he Is domlplled has been paid."
50 U.S.C.A. Section 574. (58 Stat. 722, c.
397, sec. 1).
The Soldiers' and Sailors1 RePief Act (supra) Is clear
wherein It states that no person shall have
lost a residence or domicile. . .
;o;;l; by?%?%on
- of being absent therefrom
n compliance with military or naval orders,
'or to have acquired a residence or domicile
In, or to have become resident In or a resident
of, any other,:S%te,. . . ..or polltlcal sub-
division. . ~, while, anksolely by reason of
being, so absent. . . ."
Neither do the laws of Texas lmpreskupon one who has
purchased and Is living in a dwelling house the status of owning
and using the dwelling house as a homestead. However, we believe
the law does Impress upon one who has purchased real estate In
this state and claims It as a homestead, and who meets the
requisites of having a legally recognized homestead, the status
of being a citizen for the purpose of Incurring taxes on all
his property, whether real or personal, subject to ad valorem
taxes under Texas laws.
Whether the head of a'famlly claims one piece of real
estate or another as his homestead Is first a matter of his
own free choice and Intention. Commercial Credit Corporation
V. Smith, 143 Tex. 612, 187 S.W.??d 363 (1945).
In addition to dedication and claim of homestead by the
head of a family additional acts and conditions required by
the Texas 3aw must be satisfied to establish a legally recognized
homestead. See : 28 Tex.Jur.2d 360 et seq., Homesteads; 15-B
Tex.Jur. 1~7-178, Domicile, Sec. 3.
Article VIII, Section l-b of our State Constitution which
provides for residence homestead exemptions reads as follows:
"Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000) of
the assessed taxable value of all residence
homesteads as now defined by law shall be
exempt from all taxation for all State pur-
poses."
See also Art. 7048a, Sec. 2.
Article 7147 which states who Is subject to ad valorem
taxes on personal property In Its pertinent portion reads as follows:
Mr. John T. Cox, Page 4 Opinion NO. ~~-1322
“Personal property, for the purposes of
taxation, shall be construed to Include all
goods0 chattels and effects’;’ &nd all moneys,
credits, bonds and other e$@ences of debt
owned by citizens of this State, whezher the
.,,same be In or out of the St ae;. t . . (Under-
scoring addid. )
For purposes of ad valorem taxes we believe that.any person
who is a legal "resident" or “lnhabltant~ of this State Is also
a '!cltlzen" of this State wlthln contemplation of Art. 7147.
*A review of the law pertaining to the
residence of a soldier who Is sent to Texas
from another state under military orders
properly begins with the case of Gallagher
v. Gallagher, Tex.Civ.App., 214 S.W. 516,
518. It Is there held that the words
‘Inhabitant;1 ‘citizen’ and ‘resident’ mean
substantially the same thing. In order to
be an Inhabitant one must &qulre a domicile
or home. . .‘I Wilson v. Wilson, 189 S.W.2d
212 (Clv.App. 195).
See also: Cobbs 14 Tex. 594 (1855); Stone v. PhllllDa,
142 Tex. 21b, 176 S.W.2d gj2 (1944).
SUMMARY,
A member of the Armed Forces who claims
a legally valid homestead exemption within
Texas is a "citizen" of this state within
contemplation of Artiole 7147 V.C.S., and
all personal property as defined In this
Artlole and owned by him, ,and not exempt
from taxation by other pro~lelons of Texas
laws, Is subject to ad valorem taxes.
Yours very truly,
WEA/cm
WILL WILSON
APPROVED: Attorney Qeneral of Texas
OPINIONCOMMITTEE :
W. V. Oeppert, Chairman BY: &&c&&f
a .
Henry Bgaswell Assistant
Arthur Sandlln
Riley Eugene Fletcher
REVIEWEDFOR THE ATTORNEY ffENERAL
By: Houghton Brownlee, Jr.