Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

,. mrch 5, 1958 Hon. Robert 3. CalV&Pt OPINION NO. ww-382 Comptrollerof Pub110 Aoadunts Austin, Texas Rer Whether or not S.B. 143 R.S. 55th Leg., rpeals Artiole 7047 (38f,:V.A.O,.S. whloh levies an ocoupa- tion~..ta%ondealers in C&non CPackel'sland re- Dear Mr. Calvert: lated'qu*stione. ,Your,reqhestfor an opinion scads, in part'86 follow6: -' "Artiole j047(38) Vernon's Clril Statute6 levies an occupationtax on dealer6 in Cannon Uracker6, etc. The Fifty-fifthLeg- lpllrture, Regular Session,.paEEedSenate 'bill :143 entitled 'Fireworks- Regulation and.bffcnses'. ,~.,~., ".‘ . . : '!Wlllyou please let me have:your opinion on the following questions: '1. Does Senate Bill 143 R.S. 55th ,Legiala- 'ture repeal Article 7047(39) V.C.S.? : "Article 7, Section 3 of the Conatitutlonof the Staqe of Texas reads in part as followsr --"!One-fourth of the revenue derived from the 'Stateoacupatlon Taxes *** shsll be set apart 6m~lly for the benefit of the public free schools;* l * "2. Ia eaah of the fees levied by S.B. 143, Acts of the Regular Seasign, 55th Legislature an ocoupation tax within the meonlng of Article 7, Sea. 3 of the Constitutionof Texas, whloh require6 one-fourth of the revenue to be oredited to the available, school fund?" Hon. Robert S, Calvert, Page 2, Opinion No, ~~-382 'In answer to your question number one, Senate Bill 14 R.S. 55th Legislaturedoea not repeal Article 7047(38 "which levies an occupationtax on dealers in Cannon Crackers. S. B. 143 is entitled "FIreworks - Regulation and Offenses." The bill classifies certain types of flra- works, define6 the classes of "persons, firms, aorpora- tions or assoclationsndealing in fireworks from the " manufacturerthrough the retailer, both Inclusive;pro- vides for safety standards and under seotion 5 entitled "License Fee#, defines the persons; firms, aorporations or association6who must 8eoure a li.cense, the different types of licenses appliaable and the aost of said licenses, Then bill further provides that the monies received from the above mentioned lioen6es shit11be placed In a special fund in the State Treasury and used for the Administrationof the Act a6 presoribed and, a6 stated in Section 12, on January 1st of e&oh year the unused portion of said fund6 in said speolal acoount for the past fiscal year shall be paid over and become a part of the general fund. S. B. 143 Is a regulatory and licensing law passed under the,policepower of the state and the monies received from the licenses issued under the Aot are license fee6 and not oaaupation taxes. '.Xty.of.Ft. Worth v.~Gulf~Reflning~Co.83 S.W. 2d 610, Texas Supreme C rt* Cannon.v.,C%tyof Dallas, 263 S.W. 2d 288 (C. A. W$t Af error ref. N.R.E.1; Sec. 27 Tex. Jur., _ P. . 892 and cases cited therein. .- Since the fees mentioned in your question number two are license fees and not occupationtaxes, the revenue derived therefrom should be allocated a6 presoribed in Section 12 of S,B. 143. SU M.WA ROY Lioense fees aollected under S.B. 143, Acts of the Regular Session 55th Legis- lature are not occupation taxes within Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 3, Opinion No. ww-382 the meaning of Art. 7, Seo. 3 of the Constitutionof Texas and said law doe& hot repeal Article 7047(38) V.A.C.S. Youra very truly WILL WILSON Aaal&nt Attorney General JCP/fb APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Qeorge P. Blackburn, Chairman J. C. Davis, Jr. Wayland Rivers, Jr. C. K. Richards REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY QENERAL By: W. V. OEPPEqT