Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

. : . . ,~ ..:. . OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF rrxAs Q- c. m&w4 AUSTIN AH-- . : Honorable 3. P. Parker Co:nty kttornep Commohe County :Ccmanohe,Texas ’ ale of the properties,if any sucl:. up03 constructl.oncosts wotid be confis- hecauee of the 103 ear2.lz.g pwer 32 the pro- lngs aethod, chculd be given garmomt conslderetion,byths Ward 'in this tax v.aluatloa. It is'fzrt:Xrpointed out tkat t.",a Ccmn;?cbeCounty. Z?uralSleotrificatlonAd2~i~istratlon, a oor~o7ationOr~etizedun- der thf2zi.Z. k., isa, as 0: Zancury 1, iaa, sanstr.3cZeda>proxi- matsly sixtpf3ur allea oi cmpleted pomr lines at a coat of a- bout $490.00 Fez rzlle,far tke pspose af ?ir-lisi&k~electrical gsnorable D. P. Parker, Page a ,A~._ energy to the rural seotlons of Zastlaud County,not with en ob- jeot ol profit but of servioe to the e:~iculturalcozmnity. Zow- ever, it is sttitedthat the lm income return is not due to the non-profit charester of the enterprise,but to the thinness of the territory served by it, o?d the relativelyhi;yhtivestrrentia fixed properties in oozparisonv&th earsing poplar,a conditionv.$ichha's prevented private utilities frm serving these rural areas. To resolve this oontrovertJy you ask the following ques- Mont 8 ?&at shAd be the prlnoijlest&t, the Cm&- aloners* Court sh&ld adopt in a.vr1vin.a at fair snd just tsxation?w _. Article 7174, of Ve&on~s AnnotatedCivil Statutes of Texas, 1925, as mended, sets 'upcertain requirezestsrelating to the valuation of real and personalproperty for ad val0X.z tax pur- pOSeS. The articlefin questionprovides,in part, as follows: Pooh separate parcel of real property shall be valued at its true end lull value in z~oney,exclud-, ing the value of mops grcru%3ggr uxigeethered,thereon. /-- coindeterzzningthe tNe a3d full'valtie of'real aad personal property the assessor skall not adopt a laver or different standard of value beaause the se.m is to serve as a bnsls of taxation,aor,shall,hoadopt as a criterion of vaUe the price f6r which s*uchFro- perty would sell at augtlon or a forced sale or in the aggregatewith all the propertyin his county; but he shall value eaoh~tractor lot by itself, az3.at sI*nham and pioe as he believes the sem to be fairly rrorthin money at the ti=lesuah assesszestis nade. . . . *Personal. property of every aeaariptlonshall bs r&ued at its true and full value in,~oney,~ Artiole 7149 of Vernon'sAnnotatedZevised Civil Statutes of Texas, 1925, as mended, provides as follcris8 I The ten, ttrus eu?ofull value';w!ierever used shall be held to aoan the fair zzarketvalue, in cash, at the place where the property to Which the tern is appllod shall be at the tine of assessznt, belng the prioe which could be obtained thereforat private sale, 833anot at roroad or auction s,ale." 2 ,*: .- ,F---._ The term 3arket YeI.& ,* “fair market value, * ~*caah market value, * *fair cash market value” end etrue and full val&e in money* have been held to be synonymous tern. 40 Tex. Jur. ‘. 150. I 9iarket value* or Vair market ~&lue* has been defined ea “the ezount OS Honey that a person deslrin3to sell, but hot bound to 00 so, oould, within a reasonablet&e procure for ouah : propertyfrm a person who desires and is able to buy, but is not bomd to purahase the property. It is the mount thet oould be obtained at grivate ~sale and not a ~foraed.or auotlon sale.“, 40 Tex. Jur. 150. ,_ ” Under this-detinltlonend the fasts before us, we think it rzy’be assumed thet the propertiesof the COnenche Coruty Eleotric~Cooperative Assmiation, looated~ .inZestlendCounty, either have no eotual *r;arket value,O d?reto ‘theslz3le gurgose and multi-aounty nature of the propertyand its conse~.ucnt war& oi a reedy narket as other realty and personalty,bosszonly bought and sold; or lf a mrket value z?aybe seid to exist, it Is so Us-,‘- proportionateto the oriEioe1 aost of the properties, less depre- alation, or ths reproductionoost, iess.depreaietion; as to afford no reasonable and proper basis for Yaluation by the Soar& of ‘Equal- izetion bf Zaatland County. : Thus we see &at the broad &id .dozina& crltsrlon pres-~ oribed b$ the Le~islatwa for the valuetiol? of prop&ty for tax purposes~ i. 0. ihe reasonablecash value o.fthe $operty on the market, or v&at it oan be bou&t ant sold for, is difficult if not tigosslbleof qgllcztlon ns the aole~factorof value. Consequently upon this a8suspAon, we turn to the deoisionsof thh and othsr jurisdictionsto det..rrdne the aocegted w recognized nethods of valuing property for tex purposes in swh situations. Intrinsia vsbue Is not amtiosed in the statute t&t de- fine0 the pcxveroof th6 Zossd Of yqueli~stioil($2.) tit. 7206) but it is only stated that the Eoard shall “bause the assessor to bring before then at such meeting all assessmentlists, etc. . . . to aae that every person has redderedhis propertyat a feir market value.96 fcLEphnsisours.) It h&s been noted that VAir nerket valuea is the basis required of the Assessor under Artiole 7174. 1s this~~Qo.~cotfOa it my be golnted out t;latArticle 7211, Vernon’sA22otsted ilevised Civil Statutes,.providesthat “IS such property shell be found to hare nb market value by such officer (t5.ewsessor), then at such •~ aa r&d ofClc,er shJ3 deem the ret+ 01 intrizsiovalue of the L p,, I. ,. ‘. i . Eaorable Il.P.~Perkar,Page 4 propartY." Therefore, it scelzsttit the %erd, as well as the AssaSSOr,nay and'shoulddeterzinevalue a:cordingto intrinsic. ;g;t in instanceswhere the property in quuestioxl has no narket . 40 Tax. Jur. 149. ~Bkethkror not the propertiesinmlved hers, dw to low or non-existantearnin. power, or to the nature of the pro- perties and the use to whioh they are put, have or do not have a "fair market value," 80 a5 to enable th3 3oard of Equalization to daternine, the "true and fi~llvaluetinploney"of the progsrty on the basis of the price which auah propertywould brFr.3at sri- .vatesale, pursuant to the literal tense of the'abovequoted stat; utes, is-IIpure question of faot which this Zepsrtnsntis not oonpetentto pass upon,.andit is not, by this opinion,under- stood to be so doing. ZIowev6r, easuain,q,froiil the facts stated, t&i absence of an establishedmarket value for these properties which wodld rspresent the:s*true andfull value" thereof, it is our opinion that the Board of Zqualization,in arriving at in- .trinsiovalue for tax purposee,~ zag.properlyand legally consider all pertinent facts, eatixates,forecastsand oirc*sastoroes bro!l?ht to its attention or establishedand recotgizsd ea f~danontallp~ casential and reasonablyrelated to,the.questionof v&116, either _eer the principles of Joxmon law~or a&non aenee. The Lewis- ~I' r‘,latureh5s vested in Poarda of Zquallzation,as,oonstit*&edby statutes,'theoole discrstlonin the valuationclld tie equaliza- tion of ths valusa of property eubjeot to taxation. Their action is clothed tith the presuznption that it has been rightly nade on the baois of actual valueand courts will deoline to disturb su* assessnantsunlsas sham to be arbitraryand grossly excessive or based upon a funde~eotallywrong principalor retaod of detemin- fug value. 40 3x. Jur. 156, Great NorthernXailxay Company v. Ueeka, 297 'J.S.195; 80 L. Ed. 932. ,:..,I. Certainly if the oouvts are loath to dist?rrb the die- aretion of Boardsof Zqtalizatloain disahargin~their s'titutory duties of 'assessingand vaiuin;,propertyfor taxation,then, with strong3r reasons, this 3spartnsnto~lnot pkoperiy,in advance of the exercise 3f such discretionby the EqualizationZoard of xaath4a c9mlty,outline end prescribe,by tie requestedopinion, any t3yLit.m,fomula, ruls or rethod for the oontrol and guidance of said Soara in ths aisaharge of its duties. %or can said Soard .tbe oonpelled to aubzit to exanizetionas to the operationof their ninda in arriving at tis *true and full valus" of the property before then. Cn the other hand, we thlnk'wsnag pkpsrly point out som of tds fornulas.oreystaas aomotily _, used by tax officiala /I ,,: - ..-~ . . .' ", - Bonorable D. P. Parkar, Page 5 in valuing property for'taxationand axzovea by the aourts, where market value is non-existent. Some of these are: (1) orig- inal cost cr re?roduationcost, less a rsaemable annual depre- oiation; (2) "the etmk and bo;ldnethod," or the averagemarket priae of ths outstandingstocke and bon5e of a corporation; Great Ziorthern-Xallnay Co. v. iieeks,supra; (3) *tie capitallza- tion of net ope-stinginaoms ~.ethod;~ 26 H.C.L. 367, 368; Grsat Northern Railway Co. v. Zeeke, eupra;Parsoae, st al v. Detroit k Canada Tunnel Co., et al, 15 Fed. 2upp. 926, aff. City of Ds- .,troit Y. Detroit E;Canada Tunn& Co.! 92 Fed. (2)'33. . The laet formula or msthod for.acouratelydetermining the *true and full value" of propertyPer taxationpurposes by tax assessing officials and boards has been, by ths courts, in the cited zaaee and others, approved as beiq particularlyappli- cable to railroads and pub110 utiliti4sof variouskinds suoh as ferrye, bridgse, canals, toll roads, pipe lines and elsctrio powsr ana eerviae oompenles,euuh as the one involvedin the in- stant case. The wcapitel.ization-of net izlcoae rnethtivmay be rtated aa follows: " When property has a known and determinate . value aeasrtaicedby commera4 in it, as~.inmany kinds or parsonal propsrtyariain aertain classes . of real estate, them can be no difficultyin ae- aertaining its val*uefor purposes of taxation. In many ce3es, however, ~24 asosssortae no s;ich eatisfaatoryguide, and muet value the property by other z14acs. In euah cases, if the property is devoted to the uee for %%ich lt ~143 desiiyned, and is in a condition to pro&ace its maximum in- 0438, one very important 416mentfor ascertaining its present value is tie net profitsaerlved thcre- from. In suah a ease the tax ie not levied Won th4 earnin.zsas ezch, but the earninEsare treated ae a guide to tie capital valus. Ths valus of the proparty is arrived at by oap$taliziagthe net icoons therefra at the rate of return prewiling in the sem seatim of the -countryupon InvsstzIsnte o? a sl-silarotiracter. In dsterainini; the net 11100~4 of any itsm of property a3 E basis for valuation for the purpose of taxation,t5a average net income fm a umber of y4ars should be oon- eldersd, rather t;Fi;hs earnic.~s of a sin?Je ySar standing alone. , however,the eaiiin~capa- oity of th4 property a8 distinguishedfrom the .,-. .. . z .Hmorable D. P, Farlser,Page 6 T-- aotual earnings that is the proper slanentfor oon- sideration in fixing a.8 valuatLonOSprop3rtyfor ' taxation. . . .* .26B.C.L. 367. In ugholdirtgthe wcapitallzationof net earnings~prin- oiple for the ga:danoe OS tax officialsin the valuationOS pub- e other system or Sormlas above 110 utlllty propeztles over tii emmeiated, u&er statutes ahost identicalto those whloh 20vern here, the oourt, in the case of'Pemms TV.Detroitb;Cmada Tur- ml Co., supra, saidr $ *The original, or rearoduotion;construction cost of tt,iat\;r;sa~is so 6nOPnauS thst there Is absolutelyno aowrent relatttion between suoh cost and its earninE cnpaoity. Kor does such cost ap- pear to have any possible bearing upon such eaiitig CsQacity. IS nature had aonzitruoted tbls tunnel in its preeent Soxz, it v+lU ba as valuable to its owner a8 it nav is. It would'be as val&ble to the owner or a prospectivepurohaaer,re&ardlessOS its original cost. ItS OOSt dOeS E&t &XX]-S ClteF hItO the questionsas to what price a purchaserwould pay 'I .03-aselier 7souldtake. The basis So? a sale price wuld be the present, ar.d probable Suttie, taming power of the property; erd certainlypresent and past earnings are proper and tigortantSactors in $.idgi~gwhet eazzings my fairly be expeatodfn the -' SutumL -. _. 'Therefore It ie t5.ecouolusionOS the ooiirt that the tunnel i;roperty here involvedis OS auoh character as to be usable for a single purpose only; that it is devoted to the public serviceunder reg- ulations and oetkxls oS operation,a6 to classify it as a aublio utility; also that the capitalization cl earn&s nethod should hare been~given, controlling considerationed eSSect bytho assassin:< ol'floers in.arrivizIg at the true cash value of the >ropsrty, witbin ths ntanlng and oooF)e,o? tke ap::licable Xioh- &.n statutes; that the taxing authorities,in basing their valmtions for the tame years in qus.stLon. eatlrely upon dspreciatadCost, ecd in iailicg to give imy cohsidertitioz or xrc2Thtto the capitaliza- tion of net irso-& method, have adopted e fundazental- ly erro:.eozs 2ri:;ciple or rathod of arrivingat the true cash value 31 t;leEroperty in ques:log,in viola- tion OS tLejducip,mcess clsute of th6 EwXeenth Amendmnt to the ConstitutionOS the i?nltedktatss, 1 .. a&~ i; .HonorableD. F. Parker, Page 7 EM-. and the reaultlng assestmtntsare thereforeIllegal and void. . . ." We reiterate that the groper Somfila,nethod or prinod- pie to aide the Eoard of EqualizationOS Xaatiand CounQ~ in the perfoxzanceOS their statutoryduties OS dete,-ini=%the *true and full value" of the propertiesoI + the CozamheCoucty 2lectrio COOpiQtiVe Assoolatl3n,is not 3ure to dooide, bat rests square- ly ar.dsolely within tha sound disoretlooof tilesa:d Bomd.~ It is their province to hem the avideme azd weigh the Saots, cir- amstmioes and conditions8urromliIigt-he;rro?ei-ties ir:question end therefrm deterzxine vhi3ti3i the three sethods, Sorml.aa or Prinoiplssaug;-Tested hereimbote, or my others, aiiiglyor in. ambifiation,will be best ada_s';ad to the peculiar facts of this aase. in other words, this opinion should not be understoodto hold that the wca~ltali-&tionoS net inoo~e aethod2+is the anly. one applicableto the faots of this case, to be exoluslvelyand xeiy Sollmed by the Dcard. UC are mrely pointtiogout that 6uOh mtiiod ~a_y: be lawfully consideredby the Eoardj if ,itap?ears~ iron the facts adduced before then thatmch nethod is beat cal- auleted to arrive at the *true and full value" 0S the Froperty. But, if soy otbr xzethod , grinaiple or.forzula,whether clistmssed .T-- herein'& not, arjpsaisto the 3aard to better establishsuch "true and full value," then said Eoard is et llberVJ,tofollow such method, subjeot, OS oourse, to revieelr by the courts in the &amer -herein discussed. .:, : Trawtlng the foregoing Sully armveru yaw inqw, we are Tauzs very truly