Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

PRICE DANIEL ATTORNEY GENERAI. Bbri.'cfeo. H. Sheppard Comptroller sf PubLia 4coouaW~ Austin, Texas OpPnlon Ho. v7252 Be: Whether land aold t0 t&4 g&/t8 UadeP tax fopwGlomPe UIIC der B~tiele 7328 in D48*, I&. Shwppimd: aubjeot to taxation Where land was soldl00 the ~Btrtbfazr ablinquaao texe8 twoa r0m4m3aw5 0f aa lien for unpaid tsxea and bald by i%.ftaB the purpose of resale tml*n ttw provLaLoQs si AHScle 7328 R.C.S. 1925 and whwra wwh property h8s been contOt&Waaly oarrled m the essessment rolls & the Coujhy Ln the nwme of thw to~$er owmera, can the Tax Col- lector colledt dellnquwnt tBxes for the period,duriag;wblch tb%a property was held by the State fop sW.ohp#%poW~9 "Id the wowmt tbat.jrouhold that the County atbnnot oollwot auob,taxes, what mwth- od should ba uaed in ~euiovingfrom tkm r@ll8 of tbw County the property so held by the State upon a public aale th83XWf in aGO@Pd- ence with the provZeian8 df the foregoitlg' statutw? wmpw Ia4 scrmesftuatfon wxis'ts rlth rsfwrwacw to ottler end school die,- triaes 6% psopertg held by the SWta for stlgh ptwpaaw, is the City end Sahool District etitthorlzed to collwot such taxes?" In our op%ni~n ~lo.~668, I copy of which ww are enclosing, we held that where the State bedame ths purchaser of Land at a ‘%4X sale held in accordanow with thw proviaioum Qf OPt~clw 7345-b, V.C.S=, that "the PUP- c+asw by the State vwrtr %a it a defwaaible title, wbioh tftl8 i8 etidenced,by,the WiZ@lfi'B d@d, and.tMt @II . . Bon4 6380‘ 8. Shepp82Yl - P8&3 2 holffePOf thin title th8 Stat8 18 tb4 “oWIIWP” of such property foP purposea of taxation", sod theref;ri$- wxmpt from taxation until sold by the hate, op3&on lo. Od265, e oopy of wbUh bs alao wtlcloawdwe bald that wbera the Stetw b8oeme the pu~4b8swP ,eta t8x a4lw held in ewcord8nce w%th the pPoolalona of Apt- Iale, 73;‘8, v,C,S. that "6 selw (selw by State aft& purolwsawat fo~e~10an~w~oP tax liwa) und4~ drtiale ~328 will aonvey title free of tares accruing b&Do4 Cb4 SCetm~n purchase of the,lend". Shoe the 8boVe mentioned opinions WePe wH.t- tea, tbw &@Peme Couxt of TWMB in City of Austin vs. Shw@r@d 190 S;n, (2d) 406 held that property p~bweed b tha Olty of'k.utitlin bY tea iorseloL4imesa,lws,and held or Pssa~a tr,"publtc property bwli¶for wittrbiru the Gons%iCuti@n WXMptlmg awh p&wpM?ty srom teJcreti@n. 4rtt,1165 et swq.; AH. 2X1 SW, 9, %X&8 thQbti'bUtdQt%~bf8 C8b aOnC8iWW tl@50 3?608W &a u@plr B dlfferxbnthula to la&a pwbeswd by tbw~~St4te r% fax rwiwl0e,ttp8sat~e. SW #l+ ChEldr44s Cowty xc $mtwi~ %$&,s*w* @c#) 0690 In map rwaent Opinion X0. V-16;LIwe held that fb,$*AIS, 38, Fiftieth Lwgleleture, proV3.dlngfor the @Q* meratof'aertein t4xss WI&#Strlteowhwd lelsaato certain codnbw~a ,outt%?the Qwnera1 IRand of the Stete, is uuco~l- 4tttGlti~naland v&d as V%&8tiV8 Qi tb8 ~l?~~iSlotM Of kzl~lwl8TIE, seoellon51,.a~rd4wmQ;e x5* sw010n 9, cwta= @tituwm vf !JMxwl”. Bon. war II. Sheppard - page 3 W6 lEtlOT or no stetute authorizing the removal of pt'opertyfrom the tax rolls. In order for the tax &ollr for the years the propeFtj v&s he16 by the State to dlrclose the facts the tar collootor should enter thereon the notation 'non-trxable-- owned by 8Wte" or rords of like iwort. Lends pumzhased by the Stete, at tax fmecltitwe 8*16B, ami exempt from all taxa- tion unttl resale .a provided by atotute. If #blahprepwtf 18 placed on the roll9 duirlmg them years 80 held by the State, the roll8 8hwX.a M'kb(bt the fact that tlcwhpmpertf 18 exempt by rmbam of Stute ounershlp. Ioum very truly, Asgwlam Q-L OF TSXAS Y$ v. osppert Asaiskht