Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

816 OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN &xsorobla Y. 0. Flower8 se~e~r;yof~statl * Doa! Sir; Attsntionl I&. iittormyp x levied by raid oorporatloar under of ArtIsle 7lo5, are now paying their r the terse and provirriona di~hi0n f~) R. c. s. 0r h of thr total amount of ohacked R nwabsr or tham oor- et contend they ars required to ~~'intangibJ.ataror and find that in truth on& In taot they are not pejizg any lataaglbla taxes, ncrsrthalasr, payiq only 115th of their gnahlae taral umlar Artlola 7084, Bubdlrlaion . Eonorabls IL Q. Plowers, ps::t 2 "~looe% 5llOw WI t0 direct your ott6R- tlon to ths r0ii0viingunderllnsd portion of Article 7284, Subdlvlalon (E), 8. C. S. of Tuoa, *(b) CorPoratIona whloh --are now re- ~gi$l~O~t~ ,J?-%e"g!!!~lge~~ the tarmTTKls partioiilaratntute it ~a8 the purpose 6nQ intention of the L6gii3l6tUr6 to persit these corporatlcns W.-pay 1/5t.h Of their franchise tsxas, u&see they me &Ctllallypayin intangibls taX6s. W4 under- stand a nuaber tf thes6 corporatlone contend for varloar r4asc.m they do not ova lntan- gibls taxes, when aasoss%d by tho Intsngiblr Tax Eoard, and at the saae tlmr prspare and file their franchlee tax return with thle department classifying themselyes ee corpora- tions required to pay the intangIble ter. "x6 will apprdolate your answer to th% r0ihing question: "Doe% a corporation have to pay ennuallp lntarqlble taxes upon Intangible asrrets before bolng an- titl%d to tb6 4/5tha redUOtiOn Of Its franahlse tax64 under Artlale 7084, Sub&lvlrlon (b), R. C. S. of Tares?" Artiole 7105, Vernon*s Annotated Clyll Stetutelr, larlee an Intangible tax upon oertaln Remed corporationa in the foll~wlng lnnguage: Taoh lnaorporet%d railroad co3lgany, forry ocmpany, bridge oou;pany,turnpike or toll oomppany,011 pip6 line aompany, and all uommon oerrier pip4 llna ooqwmiea Of 6Y6ry UhharaOt%r Wh?lllte!OeY%r, %II@g%d ia tb6 traneportatlan of Oil, aO* basinads vbolly or in part within this State, vhetb er inaorporeted.undar the laws ot this Stat%, or or any other State, t%rrltAW, Of fore&n aountry, snd every other lndiyldual, OoWmnuIJ~ corporation or assooiation doing busin%se of the same chareater in thle State, in 0dditiOll to the ad oelorem tares >n tangibl% proper- SionorebleM. 0. FU~~6rst 95% 3 tie8 which era or say be lrspoaadupon them rospectloaly, by lew, shall pay en ennuel tax to th6 State, beginning with the iirat dey Of Ja2IUarg Of each yaor, 013 t?6ir ln- tan@bl% asset% and proptrty, an4 local term thereon to the counties in uhich its business Is aarrldd on; uhlch addltlonel tax shell bs eas%ss%d and lavl%d upon suah Intangible asasts md property in the men- ner prorICed In this cheptor. The county or oountlcs in which such texss era to be paid, en4 tha manner o? epportionment or the 8890, rh%ll b6 dstarmln64 in eaoor4ence wlth th6 prOViSiOn% Of thiS chapter.” Subdivision (B), Artiala 7084, VeruoaL'eAnno- ktted Clril Statutes, or4et48 a pert161 sxemption in ieyor o? oarteln oorporatloca ?roa the tex lcrled by subdlvlslon (A) o? said franahlse tex statute, whloh examptlon reads es iollans: '(B) Corporationa whlc);are now ra- qu5rad by law to pay annually a tax upon lntenglbl% aaaets, oorporatlona owning or operetlng rtreat rallwa~tiin or upon th% public strsati o? any touQ or efty, en4 oorporatlons organlzab to meintaln or own- ing or operating aleotrlo interurban reil- vfiya,shell be raqulrad to hsraafter pa a rrenohlad tax aqua1 to one-flrth (I./57 o? th6 franahlza tax h6r%in lmpos~d qeiDSt all other aor~retlons under Section (A) h6r4ln.c The aorpomtion In question aon@nde ?or the right to at&s a Trmahlss tax return en4 peym6nt on th% beais of one-Slith o? tha total ?renahl%% tax l%yl%d by subdiylslon (A), Artials 7084, Vernon's ,knWzdsd Clril Statutes, end pal4 by tha corporations therein -%4. Thla parttal axamption is eaaarta4 under aubdiyiaian (B) o? the frenehlss tex atatuts next above quoted, an4 is deubtlaes upon the theory that the m6r% nemlng o? such corporatlonn in hrtlala 7105, Vernon*8 Annotatatl Cfvil Statutas, as bolng pot%ntlelly subject to an ad ralorem tax on intanglbla essota, brings th%m squer%lp Honorable M. 0. Plovers, page 4 within the purview of this partial exemption from ths franGhise tax. With this contention we cannot agree. It la Our conolusion that there must rest upon the oorpora- tione Olaking this partial exemption from franchise taxes, en aatual annual llablllty for en ad .valorem tax On their lntenglble asasts, rather than a mere theoretical or potential liability for such taxes. In other words, not all of the corporations described in Arti 7105, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, become liable each year to this tax on Intangible assets, as such liability dependa upon the facts appearing in the COrpOret8 statement required by Article 7106 and Article 7lO7, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutea, and the msthod of computation fbllowed by the Intangible Tax Board in arriving at such tax liability for any given year. It, under all of the pertinent articles of’Chapter 4, Title 122, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, conoerning the levy, assessment and oollection of taxas on -tangible assets, no such tax is oertifled by the Intangible Tax Board to the assessors of the various counties of Texas against any given corporation for a partloular year, then how can it reasonably be said that such corporation is *required by law to pay annually a tax upon intangible assets* within the language of subdivision (B), Axtfols 7084, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, so as to al- low such corporation to pay its franohise taxes on the basis of one-fifth of the total tar levied? In determ- ining whether or not a oertaln corporation is “required by law to pay annually a tax upon Intangible aaaets,* it ia neoesaary to refer to all of the pertinent statutes’ for the assessment end oaloulatlon of such tax, beoauae Article 7105, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutea, in levy- ing said tax, provides that *suoh additionel tax shall be assessed and levled upon such intangible assets and proper- ty in the manner provided in this ohapter.” This oonolusion is without ths benefit of support- ing authorities, beaause this ia en open quea~ion in Texas; being relegated to the bare text of the etatUt inmlrsd, we are constrained to sooord to such statute a reasonable. rather than an unreasonable, construotion, end we, feel that the foregoing conclusion end an errirmative answer to your question 1s the only reasonable’Construation. Honorable ki. 0. Flowers, page 5 Tbo manifest @mpose of subdlvlsion (B). Art- lole 7084, Vernon*s Annotatad Clril Statutes, Is to lessen to tbe extent of four-fifths the franohlrre tax burden resting upon eorpoTatlaus which w6ro likewise liable ror tax on tbolr lntanglble assets. If, from oontrolllng statutes, it eppsars that no assessment ror suoh lisxon the intangible assets of said oorpora%lons Is OS can ba oertlflod by the Intangible Tax Board to the proper tax officials of the various oountiee In whloh the property of the oorporatloa is found, then such oor- poratlon does not have to pay the eddltlonal tax oa intangible aeeeta and the reason for the exemption of such corporetlon from the payment of four-fifths of ita franchise taxer no longer obtains. To ellw suoh oorpontlon to pay only one-lift& of the rranohls6 tu lsrled against it, whlle other oar- poratlonci ,arapaying such rranahi8e tu in It6 entlretr, would be to oonter a gratuity or gift upon such oorpom- tion, and the intention to do this Ml1 not be aaorlbed to the Legislatare, absent lauguaga l.n the statute oom- pelllug such oonstmotlo~. Tours vary truly BT