No. 3107
Oanoernlng Artlole Xv, Rouse BlllR6. 8, Aota
Regular g~aelon 47th Leglilature, lmppalng a ~ .
attip tax’upori’tranafbre cuid .dullverle’a of
ahweb or oertlfloataa of atook, ind holding:
I. l&t the aoquisltlon by a aurvlvlng
rife of’an undivided one-half lritereet In atook
formerly owned, by the oommunlty, auoh one-h&f
Lntereat~repre.sentl.ng her inbereat In the aom-
tnunlty eatate, la not subjeot to taxation under
the above memtloned Aot.
R.. l’hat the eoquleltion .by a aurvillng
&e;, aa heir et law of her deceased hunband
under ,Azhestatute of deeoent end d$s~rlbutlm,
df~‘an undivided one-half interest in atook,
repreaentlng the.husband*s lntereat in the
oomunlty, la.noiy aubjeot to taxation under the
above mentfoned dot.
.3i .,That the aoqulsltlon by the’aurvlvlng
” am l+tgsitee’yider her huabcmdra wlil,
+f.kd; of :
+ WdlvIded one-half intereat ltx atook, repre-
tqentlng thchueband*e Interest & the oommunlty,
.: la embjeot to tax&tlon under the above mention-
led &oti,‘and the tax le me&m&d by the till nunw
ber oi’iharea Leottianalerred.
m - e .-~e B - y - m - - i - - - a -:m m - - -_.. e i - ,- - -
Hcnww&ble~Oeorge H. Sheppard
Comptroller of Pub116 Aooountd
AustW ..Te-a
,T)ear Sir: ,. Oplnlbn HO;“O~4134~
Rel (a) Dpea e stook transfer tax
eoihe under AtiioIi5 XV; Rotiee
Bill 8, Aoti Regular $eai~lon,
47th Legkaleture (Art. 7047m,
Shepperd, page 2 Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes),
upon the lssuanoe of'e stook
oertlfloate to a surviving wife
to cover 1OO'slreea of atook
whloh orlglnally oonstituted e
pert of the oommunlty estate of
the deoeaaed husband and aald.
surviving wife?
(b) IS so, is *said tax computed
upon 50 share8 or upon 100 sheres?
Your letter of Meroh 26, 1942, aubiults for our
oplnl& the following question whloh we quote therefrom:
"At the time of the deeth of Texas realdent,
ha and his wife owned ln oonmnmlty 100 aheres ln a
domestlo oorporatlon. The oorporetlun took up the
original oertlfloete of lOO,ah¶res end issued to
~~ar~rvivlng wife a new oertlfloete for the 100.
Is suoh transeotlon taxable under Artlole
XV of Sousa Bill 8 of the Regular Session of the
Forty-seventh &eglsleturel IS so, is the tax
payable on SO shares or on 100 shares?"
The provisions of the Aot pertinent to thls inquiry
&e oouied from Seotlon 1, Arflile 16, es Sollowai
"There is hereby imposed end levied e tex'es
herelnefttir provided on all selea, agreements to.
.aell, or memorand@n ofsal&~, end elldelIverlea
or transfers of aharea;.or oertlfioetes of stook,
or oeFtlSloetes for right8 to stook, or oertl-
float&a of deposit representing an interest .ln
or re re.aentlng oer~lfloetes made ,texable~under
this Eeotlon In any domestlo or foreign easo-
oletlon, oompeny,.or oorporatlon, or oertlf~oetqa
of interest In any bualness oonduoted by tyuateeE
or truatees made after the effeotlve date hereof,
whether made upon or shown'by the books of the
eaaooletlon, oompeny, oorporatlan, or trustee, or
by any esalgnment ln blank or by any delivery df any
' papers or agreement or memorandumor other evldenoe
of sale or transfer or.order for or'agreement to buy,
whether.lntermedlet& or final, and whether lnvestlng c
the holder with the beneSlo$el interest-ln or ',
legal title to suoh stock or"8,ther oertlfloate .'
taxable hereunder, or with th8 posserssl~ or use
,thareof for any purpose, or ti3 seoure the Suture
payment ofmoney or the Suture transfer of any
su& '&oak, or oertlfloate, ori e&oh hundred dollars
of Saoe value or Sreotlon thereof, three (3) oents,
exoept In.oaaea where, the shares or oertlfloetes ere
Honorable George H. Sheppard, Page 3, O-413
f
issued without designated monetary v alue; ip
whloh
.-. oase _the tax ahall be at the rats of ‘three
(31 oenta for eaoh and every share.. It ahall be
the duty of the pereon or persons making or
eFSeotuatlng the sale or transfer to ppooure,
affix, and oanoel the stamps snd pay the tax
provided by this Artlole. . . . The, payment of
suoh tax shall be denoted’ by an adhesive stamp
,or stamps affixed aa Sollows~ In the oas6 of a
rale or transfer, whei-e the evldenoe of the
traqsaotlon la shown only by the books of the
aasoolatlon, oomp&ny, corporation, or trustee,
the atamp shall be plaoed upon, auoh books, and .lt
rho11 be the duty of the person making oc effeotu-
I’ sting auoh sale or transfer to prooure and fur-, .
nlah to the aasooletlon, oompany, oorpcratlan,
or truatee the requisite stamps;, and of such
aasoolatlon, oompany, oorporetlon, or trustee ~to
iSSix and oarioel ‘the same. Where the transaotlon
la effeoted by the delivery or transfer of a
oertlfloete the stamp shall be plaoed upon the
surrendered oertlfioate end oanoeled; and ln
oaaea of, an agreement to aell, or where’fhe .s$le
is effeoted by dellvepy of the oertlfloate aaalgned
ln blank, there shall be made snd delivered by the
seller to. the buyer, a bill or memorandumof auoh
Sale, to whloh the stamp provided for by this Al-MA
ole shall be affixed and oanoeled. . ..n
Alijhough traniPSera of a took, oertifloates of
stook, eta., by operetlop of law, are not expressly mado
exempt by the Stook Trenafer Tax Aot, we thlnk suoh trans-
,Sers ere not the taxable event or transaotlti designed to
be reeohed by the above quoted tax levy and arci therefoti
exoludsd, by neoeaaary lmplloetlon, from the language
used. The tax la upon “all salea, agreeinen.ta to sell, or.
memoranda of sales, and .a11 del$ver$es or transfers ‘of
” share* or, oertlfloeteti of stook” and it is “the @uty of the
person or persona making or effeotuatlng the sale or
transfer . ..to prooure, affix and oenoel the stamps and
pay the tax prqvlded~ by this &tlole.n We think this .~
language oonteinplates end presuppqsaa, aa a oondltloo to
taxability, only ohangea ln leghal or beneflolal title .~
effeoted by the affirmative eota of a party or partie
~. thereto.
Thla oonoluslon finds persuealve aup 0x-t ln
Federal end atete authorities, oonstrulng stoo R transfer
Honorable George Ii. ihepperd, page 4,..0-41 -.
,y-
tax levies subatintlally ldentloel to the above quoted.
one. We partloularly advert to deolslona of thti lnter-
mediate and final appellate oourts of New.York,: oonstru-
lng the Stook Tqensfer Tax Aot oS.thet state, from whloh
deolslona must ponsequently be deemed to heve,been.wlthln
the ~leglaletlve oognlsanoe et the time: 6l' the passage
of the lnstadt’ cot. In the. oese of Phelpd-Stoke& Estates
Ino.;’ v. Nixon, 118 N.E. ,241, the. oourt, ln holding that
a vendor’s eleotlon to pa&a title ends sue Sop .the purohase
prloe, ‘~u&n refusal df. Eurohaser to oomplete his agreement
to purohase, was .not a transfer* oontemplatt)d by the
atatute, m+de the Sollowlng pertinent oomments, after
quoting the provlslbns of the New York Aot oorreapondlng
to t,he one! herelnabove,,quoted from the Texea Aotr
‘.
?J!heee seotlons oontemplate sobthing more .
then a theoretloal ohange of tit&e. They eon-’
template some physloel. eot; the delivery of a
oertlfloete; the exeoution Andydellve’ry of a bill
of sale; an entry upon the books of the oorpora-
t1O.l. It is euoh a transfer as is referred’to
in seotlan 162 of the Personal Property Law. A~
thnsfer la defined in the Century Dlotlonary apx
‘**The oonveyanoe of the right, .tltle or, pro&
~‘ty, etlher real or personal, from one person to
another,’ elther~ by aale, by glit or otherwlse.r
‘*I, Bouvler it, 1s aald that a transfer 1s;
n*The aot by whioh the owner ‘OS a ,thlng
del.&vered it tb another person with the latent ,,
of passing the rights whloh he has 5.n the latter.*
*In Rex&ok v. Dinlel, 119 @a.~ S68-S6i,
46 S.E. 438, a transfer ‘hovers any .aot. by whloh
the owner of anythlng’dellvers’ or oonveys it 30’
another with the 4ntent to pass his righter. to the
latter. In Peerre v. Hawkins,, 62 Texi 454, a .’
transfer is said po be ‘An Aot or transaotlon bY
wk,~$,~~ property ‘of ‘one person is by him vested in:
In People ex Pel Hatoh v. Reardon, 184 ~,
N.Y. 432 77 N.E. ,970,,8 L.R.A. (NrS.) 314, .112 .
‘Am. St. &sp. 628, 6 Ann. ~Cas. 616, the .oonstltu-
tlohe<y df the Stook Transfer hot.wae ln question.
There is no definition given as, to the meanlng~ of the
word 1transfer’. But the language of Judge Vann*s
opinion seems to involve the ldee that B‘transfer
Honorable George H. Sheppard, page 5, O-41
.wlthin the meaning bf the htetute neoesaitetes
some eot, euoh ee a .sele on the pert of the
trenslerror.
“In People v. Duffy-MdoInnerney Co., 122
em. Div. 336, 337, 106 N.W. Supp. 878, the
question arose whether the issue by a oorporatlon
OS its original ahares wes a transfer. me
Appellate Dlvlsltin of the Third Department said
that the ;@ietute we8 tobb~.atrlotly oonstrued,
and that e sale or transfer otiot, exoept by
Sorbed interpretation, be held to inolude an
original issue of oertlfloetes. Wntil those
o.ertlfloe~es ere onoe Issued they~oannot .be
made the subjeot of auoh sale or traflsfer as
to bring them’wIthIn the provisions of the eot
~. .requlrIng them to pay the tax.’ In the
opinions’ of the Attorney ffeneral for September
30, 1914, it wes ‘said that where., when trustees
‘named in a will, the title to the truat propertg,
Inoludlng the stook, passes to and vests ln the
subatltuted trustees, and that suoh a passing. of
title la. not a transfer within the msaning of the
cot.1 ‘The title to the stook Immediately vesta ln
the dubetltuted trusteea, not by virtue OS any
sale or transfer within the ordinary aooepted
: meaning oft thee!. te-, but by operation of liw+*,s’
m Eleotrl0 R+a&& Share Compiny v. .State,’ aS
N.JT.S-..178; .eSSlrmed 274 N.Y. 625, 10 P.R. (~2d) &8S
(1937); it was held.that transfer to new oorporetlon,
otieeted’by oonsolldetlon understatute, of shares of stook
owned by oonsolidatlng oorporatlonsj wee not su,bJeot tom
the stodc transfer tax Imposed upon @sale or transfers”
of etook,~ alnoe the .transfer ooourred bye operatlim of law,
Andythose: ftnnvl relate to sales or transfers rlthln their
tirdlnartly~ a~&oepted waning. To the same effeot is -the
ease of R0okefMler Foundation v. State, 258 N.Y.S..812,
even though new oartlfloetes of stook,werr lsaued by the
oorpor&tim, es In the instant faotual situation. With
.,reSerenoe to the taxability~ of suoh oertlfloat es,. the
oourt said:
“The oertlfIoat&s of stook are in theelves
OnlS- evldetioe of the transfer of, t Itile. Ihe title
p&a&es even if the tiertlfloates are never’. lsaued.
It was not neoefieary to laaue these oertlfioates .
to peas tlt~le herein. The title had already ,.
. ,
Honoreble.Oeorge H. Sheppard,, .Page 6 , O-433
‘I+
passed *by operation. of law., The oor@olldatlon
had been perfeoted by. order of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court had deolded the queatlon of
oonsolldatlon In favor of .oonsolldatlon.
“All of the neoeasary steps had been taken;
and, by virtue of the prov,lslona of sedtlons 50
and 51 of ~&tlole 7 of the Membership Oorporatfon
Law, the olaimant ‘by operation o,f lawt had be-
ooms vested with ths title to tha stook owned by
the oonsolldatIng oorpcratlons. The lmuanoe of
now orrtliloatea was not a transfir, but was
only. a step orsatIng .the evldaOa.*
~Ikew’lar, transfers “reaulti~ wholly by operation
of laws have oonslstsntly beenheld to be exampt,from the
Fedopal Stook Transfer Tax Aot. Se4 Treasury Regulation .71,
Artlole Sl, SubdIvlsIm ((1).
Oonraquantly, It 10~our opIn$on’.that if the
ohan ss In title .obourfiiqg In’tho Instant rltuatlon are of
the grppe" often~ donomInated *.trariaferr by operation of lawn,
ruoh ohanger, are not taxable.
Although fhs phrass %ranaSer~ by ‘operation of lawn
is often used, it la 6~ut keldom'dafined. .'phrrll but ono
gennera'l'defl.nltlon o$ this phrase' Is glven:.ln iords 6c
Phrases, ~158 *Ca&a .where~ ths title or right to property
.’ vests In a parson, not by. his Quvi aot or’ agraement,~ but .by
the operatlon of law, aa’ In the oare ,pf tha, devolutlon :of
title upon an a&sInIstrator or where the sstatr,of anlnte-
state is east upon .tha heir. I1 6. Wor’da & Phraaea 1083 (quot-
Ing from Burke vi Baokua; ‘61 .MInn. 174, 65 R.W. ,458). In
Terminals & Transportation Oorporatlon v* State, ,8.N.Y.S;.
(2d) $282,’a4 (at. ,Ol. lQS8 affirmed afi7, A RF, tt9.i t088,
14 R.Y.8. ,(8d) 495 (1959), bhs oourt raid &a
transfer 1s one nefSeoted by,soma positlvr, iagal rulr or
enaotment..:. . ;
, & the instant altuation’tha rlS* rboelved .an uti
divided one-half Intstirt ln the atook aa her portIon’ of bhe
oomllnlnlty. Prior to .the dlsnolutlsn of the 6ommunlt eatate
of husband and tha baneSi 3 al
title of eaoh to and. equal.
Moat usually the rake of oonvenlenoe or
oonvention; is In law, hblds In trust .
for hImself and for his w$fe, having an equitable
Honorable Qeorge H. Sheppard, page. ‘1, O-41
title. Rut regardless of ln whose name the legal title
rests, the equitable title of the spouses la equal, although
there oan be no partition of their Interests until dlasolu-
Clan of the oommmlty estate by death or dlvoroe. 23 Tex.
Jur ; 101-103. Upon the termlnetlon of the oommunlty estate
by the death of'the husband and the oonsequdnt dissolution
of the marriage, the moiety of the surviving rife In the
oommunlty estate is oonverted into and~beoomes the aepar&te
property op the wife. 23 Tex. Jbr. 102. guoh a ahange Ii
effeoted solely by the provisions of Artlola 2578, Vernonrr
Revised Ulvll Statutes of Texas (D?S), and oan in no way.‘
be elthbr altered or aided. by,tiy affirmative sots of the
husbsnd; as suoh, it 1s e ohenge effeoted by law and ls.not
subjeot to ae stook trenefer tax. Th1.s oonoluslon lr in
aooord with that reaohed by the Federal Bureau of Intgrnal
Revenue In asoertalning the taxability, under ths Federal
,Sto,ok Transfer Tex Aot, of indentloel ohanges odourrIng
under the Texas, Louisiana end Cellfornla oommunlty pro-
erty a tatutes . See 1940 O.GAI. Federal. Tix Servloe
p [ SS84 (Texas),
._~~_.. SlSl.- (CellSornla), 6064. (Loulalana~.
With referhoe to the re&InIng ÷d
one-half Infer&f Iii the etook In question, it must be
assumed from .the feotual situation presented, that’ the
surviving wife reoelved title to and beoame the ownsr of .
the same etther en legatee, under the testamentary dlaposl-
tlon of the hmband,~ or es dlatrlbutee under t@ statutes of
desoent and dlstrlbutlon. In either event titls. to thi8
stook; ,rhIoh oonitituted a pee of the oommunlty ‘estate ,~of
the~deoeased huabsid, vested In the eurvlvlng rife rather
than in the exeoutor or admInlstrator ~of ths estate bf aald
deoeased huab,end, aooording to the disposition required w
&tlole 3314; Vernonts Texas Clrll Statutes, providing, in
part, as Sollowar _ .
men h person dies', lsevl& a lawful will,
al.1 pf hIa e&ate devised or bequeathed by auoh
wl1l.j ah&l1 vest~Immedlatel.y ln the devlseea or
legateesj Andyali the estate of cluah person,. not
devleed or bequeathed, shall ‘vest immedI0tely in
his helra’et law; aubjeot however, to the pagment ’
of the debts of.@& testetory or Intestate, exoept ~
suoh es may be exempted by lau; and whenever a
person dies krtestete, 011 of hIa:eeta.te tahall
.vstit mdlately In hla heirs at law, but with .tha
'exoeptlons aforesaid shall.atlllbe .Uabls and
subjeot In their ‘hands to the payment of, the ‘debts
of the. Intestate; but upon ths lssu&noe of letters
Honorable George Ii. Sheppard, page 8, O-413
testamentery~or of admlnlstretlon upon any such ,.
: estate, the exeoutor or administrator shell have
the right to'the posaesslon of the estate ~es'lt
exlated et the death of the testator or Intestate,
with the exoeptlon aforesaid; and he shall reoover
~possesslon of and hold such estate In trust to be
disposed of ln accordance with law."
It has been~held that the legal oonsequenoe of
the above statute is to oest the legal title to property,
both reel and personal, direotly upon the heirs or
dlatrlbutees, In oases of intestacy, and upon the devisees
and legatees under a last will and testament; subject In
eeoh.oese to the payment of the debts of the deceased.
Ithes also been held that adminIstration Is not neoess,ary :
to the vestfng of title, but that title vests Immediately
upon the-death of the deoeesed, subjeot to payment of
debta, family ellowanoe, Sunerale xpenses'and expenses
of edmInistretlon,~IS and only,If an administration Is
deemed neoeasery. Rorrell.v, Ramlett, 24~S.W. (26) 531,
Rlohardson v. Vaughan, (Sup,,Ct.) 23 S.W. 640; Lean vi
Leas,,291 S,W. 340,'lS Tex. Jur. 595, 1STex. Jur; 172-173:
Artlole 2578, Vernon's Revlaed blvll~Stetutea
(1925), provides that the entire oommunlty passes to the
survlvIng apouee, fin oese pf lnteateoy, lf'there be no
childrenor their desoendants. ,When thIs~provlslon la
coupled'wlth the provlslons of ArtIole 3314, supre, it Ls
seen'thet if the husband's undivided one-half Interest In
the atodk In questcon passed by Intesteoy, the wife obfelned
tltle~thereto solely through the oomblned effeot .eC these :
two articles. Here too .our oonolusion la ln eocond ntth
that reached by the Federal and New York oSSlolela 9x
oonstruIng theirrespective statutes. See C.C.H. %deral
Tax Servloe, 1 6384 (Texas Intestaoy law); 6162 [@elIfoE&
Intesteoy law ! : Opinion of the Tax CommIssIon of Ne.wYe&,
August'21,, 1940 (Texas intestaoy law).
However, if the husband's undivided one-half
interest passed to the wife, not by Intestaoy, but rather
by virtue of e testamentary Instrument, executed by the
husband, the transSer,was not effected by law. Although .-
Article 3314 would operate In 'this .sltuatlon to vest title
In the wife immediately upon the death of the hsuband, this
artiole would not be the sole operative faotor Involved in
the ~trensfer, since an a'ffirmatlve eot of the husband, the
executionof the will, would have been necessary ~io,oall
the statute into operation and such a transfer would have
Honorable George H..Sheppard,;page 9,
%
‘been sffeoted thrOu& the oombined effeot o+ the statute
and the hfflPmatlve ao,tlon of the hujband. &I war aald by
the Bureau of Internal Revenue with rsfersnoe to the
Federal statute, "where stook 1s dlaposed oi by general br
speolflo provlslotr~. in the will of a' deoedent, the tranrfer
of'legal title thereto does not result wholly by operation (
of law but la.brought about through an lot of the part1413
and ruoh trmfar to the beneflolarlea.la rrubjeot to the
atamp tax. . . . * 1940 O.O.H. Federal Tax servloo ( 616&
Noreovoc, In tlila event the meaaure of the tax 1. the full
number of sharer trwferrsd, alnoe prior to the huaband@r
death neither spouse oaed a ahare outright, but laoh had
a tie-half undivided intereat ln saoh.ahare. 8.0In , looord
19lrq a.C.R Feder,al Tax Servloe, I 8064 (Loulalana oonmunltf
propertr) .~
In our oplnlon No. 0-4129 we held tiat.a. &obk
trarjafer bax looru+I), xmder thla Aot,. upori a' tramfer or atook
from an idmiqlstrator to the'helra at law; and l.n our o in-
ion No. O-5620 we 'tiled that, although auoh a fax ia no e
qolleotlble on wanaiers of rtook from a deoodent 'to the
admlnlatratop or sxeou.tor of the eatate, thwtax ia ool-
leotible Ii auoh pe~ronalrspreaeatatlve is also a legate8
OP dl&itrlbutee~and ~~oelvea rhares.or atook a8 ruob ‘Them
op$nlona reauited from a.regrettable failure proper~l~ to.
appraolate the full.~effeot oi the provlalons ~elatlng to
the lmmedlate vesting of title .to 8took patssing to helrr 0~
dlatx$buteea under Artlole SS14, aupra, and from a mlafaksn .
bsllef'that l 'transfer OS title fron’the Qord+ to the
adminlatratop and thanoe frm the latter~to the heir@ or
distributeerr Is neoeaaary under,Texar kiwi Aooovdln &rW
otirruled‘our o lnlor.No. O-4189 ln ltr antL*aty an!I OUP
oplnlon No. O-S kt90 ln ao far as,lt-la inoonsllrtant with,
tbla‘.op'Snlnion~ The portion oi opLnlon No.O-3590 holdlng.that
the tramfee of atook iporn a deoedent to h&r sreoutor oc
admlnlstra$or 1s not taxable Is oorraot ln ita raault, but
1s baaed'on untariabld preml~a~. No tax 8oUl’d 8oorUe hem
beoauts~ano trannfsr by operation of law wothamiaa;
would ooour* Upon be death of 'tie .owner, hlr atook, eb
kr~tantl,~beo~mar the'propetiy OS hlr ,helCa or legeteerr
rf setjok oertllloater:rhould iOr owe rearix~~Slrue to the
exeoutor or admlnlatrator, no tai would lo o r ue ~eo a ~tw,'
ln faot, the rdpz%rrent#lve reoelved neither legal nor
equltable title fy” ,&ha reemlng tr’ansfer.
In o\iti opinion No. O-4319 we held, titer alla,
that if a huabend~valldly~oonvaysd i&IO sharea of atook,~
forming a'part of hlr aeparate property, to the. oommunlty,
a stook tranarer tax la payable only on 500 rharea, on the
Ronorable George H. Shepptird, page 10, O-41
f
theory that the wife receives such shares while the
husbend’retalns the remainder. This portion of Oplnlon
O-4512 overlooked that fact that neither spouse om’an-
entire share during ooverture since each possessed but an
undlvlded one-half interest Ln the total shares owned by
the oommnlty. Since this portion of opinion No. O-4312
~is.dlreotly opposed to the opinion herein expressed dnd
is oontrary to the conclusion reached by-the Federal tax
offlolafs ln 1940 C.C.H. Federal Tai Sei~loe, 1 6064, the
oplnlo~ la overruled ln so far as it ‘la lnoonslstent with
this opinion.
Consequently, you are respeotfully advls~d’thatt
(a~) The aoqulsltlon by the survlvlng.rife~of an
imdlvided one-half interest in the stock, representing her
interest In the oommunity estate, 1s not subjeot $0 ~.
ta%atlon under the Texas Stook Transfer Tax Aot.
(b,). The acquisition by the survlvlng wife, aa
heir 'at law of her deceased husband under the statute of
d6soent ana distribution, of an undlvlded one-half ln-
tierest. ln the stook, representing the husband’s interest
in.the ~oommunlty, is not subject to taxation under the
above mentioned Aot.
(0) T& aoqulsltlon by the survlvlng. rife; as
le&atee. under her husband's will, of an undivided ona+alf
:lnterest ln the stook, representing the husband's interest
$.n the oommmlty, 1s subjeot 'to taxation under the above"'~
mentioned Aot, and the tax la measured by the full ntiber
of shares so transferred.
Trusting’ that the foregolng,fully answers, your
lnqulry, we are
Very truly yours
ATTORNEY
GRN- OF T&AS
BY
R. Dean Moorhead
RDN:GO/og Assistant
.I .This oplnlon has been oonsldered in oonferenoe;
approved a@ ordered recorded. Sep. 4, 1942.
s/Gerald C. Manna
Gerald C. Mann
Attorney General of Texas .
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion