Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

'Acmm~ ?a. ~~MXAB PRPCE UDANPEE A-mnIE1 nl.?nlCar\x. August 7, 1952 Hon. Robert S, Calvert Comptroller of Public Accotits Austin. Texas Opinion No. V-1496 Re: Legality of refunding motor fuel tax payments to persons supplying sand, gravel, and ready mixed concrete to highway construction COP? Dear Mr., Calvert: tractors. Your requesr for an opinfon of this office reads as follows: “We desire your opinion regarding the legality of ~ paying motor fuel tax refund claims filed wder the . two conditions explained begow. “Section l3 (b), Article 7065b, Vernon Annotatec ~Civil Statutes, pxx3vide.s in part as follows: ‘Provided, however, no tax refund shail be paid to any person on motor fuel used in any constr,uction or maintenance work which is paid for from any State funds to which motor fuel tax collections are allocated or which is paid jointly from any such State funds and Federal funds, etc.’ “Persons engaged in the business of processing sand and gravel, and ready mired concrete frequently sell and’ deliver such products to contractors engaged in the con- struction and maintenance of State highways for which pay- ment is made to such contractors from funds to which motor fuel tar collections are allocated. The contractor in turn pays for the sand, gravel and ready ..mix concrete out of the payment received by him,. While the delivery of the sand, gravel and concrete constitutes a sale of the pr~oduct the sellers are usually required to deIiver their products on and over the highway project unde~r conatruci tion where it is thereafter spread, rolled or u?cd by the contrac~tor. l Th& department has heretofore paid tax refunds to the sand, gravel and concrete diatribntors on m&of fuel use’d in the processing of such producto On the pre’mis~e Hon. Robert S. Calvert. page 2 (V-1496) that such persons are merely sellers of a product used in the construction and maintenance of State highways paid for from motor fuel tax collections distinguishing them from the contractors who actually perform the construction and maintenance work. “In another claim filed by a person engaged in the business of crushing and selling crushed rock and gravel,, .a contractor engaged in the construction of s~ever.al state highway projects paid for from motor fuel tax collections, has contracted with the rock and gravel processor to move his rock crushing equipment to gravel pits leased by the highway contractor. In this case the rock and gravel processor does not sell the crushed rockand gravel to the highway contractor, he merely crushes and pre- pares the rock and gravel for the contractor for which he is paid a fixed price per square yard of ciushed rock or gravel prepared. “The only claim filed under the above circumstances is befng held in suspense pending your opinion. ‘Will you please advise this department whether the law precludes payme~nt of tax ref:unds to persons ,who sell and deliver sand, gravel and ready mured concre’te under the conditions stated above tomhighway contractors who pay them for such products out of funds received by thencontractor from State funds to which motor fuel tax collections are allocated? ‘Will you likewis’e advise us whether the Comptrol- ler is,precludedby law from paying a tax refund to a rock and gravel crusher who is paid by a highway contractor on a yardage basis for crushing rock and gravel for him to be used by said contractor in the construction of a highway project paid for out of a fund to which motor fuel tax collections are allocated?” It is thus seen that the highway contractors using the sand, ,gravel. concrete mix, and the processe~d or crushed stone, are engaged in construction or maintenance work which is paid for from State funds to which motor fuel tax collections are allocated. .We assume for the purposes of this opinion that the use of the motor fuel in question fully meets the requirements of Article 7065bAl3, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, for a tax refund, and that the ‘use~r of the motor fuel would be entitled to reimbursement of. the tax paid except for the prohibition or exception provided for in Article 7065byU(b), quoted above in your letter. Hon. Robert SC Calvert, Rage’3 (V-1496) It is clear that if the highway contractor had himself furnfshed the sand, gravel, and ready mixed conc~rete. or had crushed.the rock and gravel for use in construction or main- tenance work which was paid for out of such State funds he .would not be entitled~to any refund of motor fuel taxes. The fact that the particular work was performed under a sub-contract, lease, rental, or other arrangement with the highwaycontractor is imy material in determining the ,legalityof the tax refund. In this connection,.it, is stated inAttorney General’s Opinion’V-1379 (1951): “r;he real test is that the highway construction and maintenance work is performed and paid for from motorfuel taxes allocated to l&e Highway Department or the countie:s in connection with highway work. The incidental fact that the prime contractor engages and pays the subcontractor who performs a certain portion of the work is nqf ‘m$terial. That the subcontractor useu the motor.fuel in construction and maintenance ~work on the highwsrys must be conceded. We think that Rortion of. the exception which reads, ‘ . . . which is paidfor from.aiy State funds to which motor fuel .ts.x collztions are allocated~.. . .’ does not have the effect of excluding from the exception the subcontract- - ors simply because they are ~paid by the prime con- tractor. It is sufficient to bring them within the ex- ception that they perform construction and mainten- ‘. ante work which is paid for from allocated funds. The work is actually done as a part of the work which the prime contractor under his contract with the Highway Department obligates himself to perform and which k paid -for from allocated funds.” It is our opinion that under the facts submitted, persons using motor fuel in seIIing and delivering sand, gravel, and ready mixed concr&e,:;or,,.crushing and processing rock and gravel for a highway contractor engaged in highway construction or mainten- ance work paid~ for,,from State funds to which motor fuel tax Cole lections are allocated, are using such motor fuels in connection with such constructio,a~ or mainte.nance work, .and therefore are not entitled to a refitrid of motor fuel taxes paid by them: I-&OIL Robert Si Cakeit, page 4 (V-1496) i SUMMARY .' Pe~rsons selIing and delivering sand, gravel, and concrete mix to, or processing or crnshing gravel or rock for, highway contractors engaged in construction or maintenance work paid for with State funds to which motor fuel collections are allocated are not entiled to a refund of motor fuel taxes upon motor fuel purch&sed and used in con: nection with such work. Art. 7065b-U(b), V.C.S.; .Att”y Gen; Op:V-l379 (19%); Yours very truly, APPROVED: PRICE DANIEL ,Attorney ~General : W; V,~Geppert Taxation Division . E. Jacobson. ,. ~, .$$qgd!jg&& R.eviewing Assist& .?bsiq.t&t ,~ Charles D&&h&r Fhst Assistant, ’