Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

NO. 3052 OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL my 23, 1939 Honorable Julian l6ontgomery state meway mpartment Austin, Tezae Deer sir: Opinion No. 0-628 Re: Are fees collected by county tax colleotore r0r ~SSU~CS 0r bupii- cete license receipts under section lea 0r Article 6675a, Vernon's Annotated Statutes, to be retained L8 rees 0r 0rricw vie ere in reoeipt 0r your letter 0r April lOth, in which you request en opinion (IB to *ether the fees collected by oounty tex collectors for the issusnce of duplicate license kelpts under Section 12a of Artlole 66758, Vemon*a Aanotated Civil statutes. may be retained by them e.8 e part 0r their reee 0r oirioe or must be re- mitted to the State Highway Department. Section 128 of Article 667%. mpre, provides 88 rollows: 'The owner of e vehicle, the li- ceme receipt ror which hes been lost, or deetroyed, may obtain e duplicate thereof, by filing with the State Hlgb- way Dspertment or the County ColleCtOr who issued the original reoeipt en ei- fidavlt that it has been loat or de- stroyed and by paying * ree or twellty- five cents for said duplicate. (Acts 1929, Forty-fir.& Legislature, Second $;ed Session, p. 172, ch. 88, Section . " It ~111 be noted that the above eeotion or lt- SElr COOtthIS 110 PrOViSiOD aS t0 What Ultimate diSpOSitiOn she+ be made 0r the twenty-rive cent r08 arter it has been collected by the Stats Highway Depertment or the county collector. This must be eecdrteined from the len- @age of Article 6675a .e e whole. Seotion 11 of Article 6675a deals with 'ices or Tax Collector". as r0ii0w.8: w.46 cc8npenestion ror his services under the provisions or this and other laws relating to the registration or ve- hlclee and chaurreure and the transrer of rehlcles, each County Tqx Collector shell receive e ur0m rea 0r rirty Cents for eech ai the first one thousend . Honorable Juliaa Yontgcmery, May 23, 1939. Page 2 receipts issued by hti esch year pureusnt to said laws; he shall reoeive e UniiOrm fee or forty cents dor each of the next nine thouesnd receipts so issued, s uni- rorm fee or thirty cents for esoh of the next iirteen thousand so issued and s unirom fee or twenty cent6 ror esch of the bslsnoe of said receipts so issued. Said compensation shall be deducted reek- ly by each County Tax collector Zran the gross collections msde pursuant to tbie Act (Article 66758-l to 6675s-14; P. C. Article SOTS) and other laws relsting to the registrstion of vehicles and chsut- reurs and the transfer oi vehicles. Out or cmpenestion so allowed County TSI Collectore, it is hereby expressly pro- dded and required that they shall pay the entire expense or issuing all li- cense receipts and number plates snd ohsutisu~r badges Issued pursuant hereto,, including the cost of labor pericmed in issuing said reoeipte, number plates snd badges and the cost of postage used in mailing *eme to spplicsnts." Two provisions of the above quoted section sre eepecislly pertinent ior the purpose of answering the question at hand: (1) "As compensstion for his le2- vices under the provisions of this and other laws relating to the registretion of rehiclss and chsutisurs and the trsns- fer or vehicles, ssch County Tax collso- tar shall reosive s unir0w ree, eta.* (2) vsid compensation ehsll be de- ducted weekly by each County Tax Collsc- tar tram ths gross collections msde pur- suant to this Act (Art. 6675s-1 to 6675- 14; P. C. Art. 607s) and other laws relst- ing to the regietrstion of rehiolss and chsurreurs and the transfer 0r vehicles." The fact that this section expressly stipulates definite fees ss ccmpensstion for the earvices or County Tax Collectors under all laws relating to the registration or vehicles end chauffeurs, and that such ccmpensstlon shall be deducted ircm the gross collections msde under these same lswe, leads to the inevitsble conclusion that this eeCtiO0 wse exclusive es to the fees of s tax collector in the sbsence or erprees provision to the oontrery snd thet srter he had col- lected his prescribed ccmpenssticn from the wgross collectionsw weekly he wss to dispose of the balance in accordance with Sec- tion 10 Or the Act. section 10 0r ArtiCle 6675s provides rm an sp- portionment of net funds collected under the provisions Of the Act between the County Road and Bridge Fund end the Stete HSghwsy Depsrtamnt. It reads 88 hollows: “On Monday of each week esch C0Uty Tax Colleotor shall deposit in the County Depository 0r his county to the credit or the County Road and Bridge Fund so amount . Honorable Julie.0 Montgomery, k&y 23, 1939, page 3 equal to one hundred (100%) per cent or net collectione made hereunder during the preoeding~week until the amount so deposited ior the current calendar year shall have reached s total sum Of Fifty Th0USSod ($50,000) DOllSrS. nTheresfter, and until the smount so deposited for the year shall have reached s tots1 or One Wndred Seventy- rive Thousand ($175.000) D~llsrs he shell deposit to the credit of ssid Fund on Monday or esch week en smount equal to rirty (505) per cent 0r c~iiec- tions made hereunder during the preced- ing week. "Theresrter, he shall make no fur- ther deposits to the credit of said rund during that calendar yesr. All collec- tions made during any week under the pro- .ViSiOnS Of this Act (Arts. 6675a-1 to 66756-14; P. C. Art. S7Os) in exoess or the smcunts required to be deposited to the credit of the Road and Bridget Fund oi his county shall be remitted by each County Tax Collector on each 8ond.y of the succeeding week to the Stats High- way Department together with carbon copies cl each license receipt issued hereunder during the preceding week. He shall also on Monday of each week remit to the Dspsrtment as now provid- ed by law, all transfer isee and chsuf- rsurs' license fees collected by him during the preceding weak, together with carbon coplss of 611 receipts issued for said fees during the week. "He shall slso sccmpsny all remit- tances to the Higbwsy Depsrtment with s cmplets report of such ccllectiens mede and dispositiec made thereof, the ionn and contents or said report to be pre- scribed by the State Highway Depsrtment. None or the monies so placed to the cred- it or the Rosd end Bridge Fund Cl e county shell be used to pay the sslsry or cmpen- sstion of any County Judge or County Com- missioner, but all said monies shell be used ror the construction end msintensnOe or later61 roads in such county under the superrieion of th. cmnty engineer, ii there be OILS, end ii there IS no such engineer, then the County Cami8s1onsrsf court shall here suthcrlty to commend the services of the Division Engineer 0r the State Highwey Departmat ror the purpose or supervising the ccnstmction and surveglng or lateral roads In their respective counties. All funds allocated to the counties by tie provisions of this Act (Arts. 6675scl to 66756-14; P. C. Art. .307s) may be used by the counties in the Honorsble Julian Montgomery, May 23, 1939, Page 4 payment or obligetions, Ii sny, isaed and inourred in the construction or the improvement or all rosds, including Stste highwsys Or such counties and districts therein; or the improvement of the roads comprising tbe'ccunty road system. (Acts 1929, 41st Leg., 2nd C. S., p. 172, oh. 88, Sec. lo)." The lsngusge of Article 6675s eepeCially in SEC- tions 2 and 4 designstea the County Tax OOlleCt~ S8ent Or the state Sigbvay Department ror colleCticn 0r all fees ccllectsble pursuant to the Act. Section 2 deals with registration: "Every Oxasr of s motor vehicle trailer or se@-trailer used or tobe used upon the public highways or this State, and esch chsurfeur shall spply each year to the State Highway Depsrt- ment through the County Tax COllsotOr or the County in which he resides ior the rsgistrstion or esch such vehicle owned or controlled by him, or for s chsufieur~s license, for the ensuing or current year or tlnexpired portion thereof; etc....." Secticn 4 governs -registrstion dstesW: "Each spplicstion riled hereunder ror registrstion or for 0hsurrsur*e li- cense during April shall be scccmpsnied by the full amount or the annual r8.e ii the vehicle was operated on the public highways or streets during any pert of April 0r that year, etc.* In CoOley on TsxstiOn, Vol. 4. 4th Edition, p. 3562, it is ststed: WA county oo11ects certain tsxes es the representative of bbe state and also sometimes es the representative end ror the purpose or s city or tonm or other tax district within its bor- ders. and other tax districts sate- AS en agent or the ststs the compensetion of ~the County Tax collector will be limited strictly to the statutory fees prescribed, and such compensetlon will not be enlarged unless by express legislstive grant. It is sn elementary law of agency that if there Is s sp~ciS1 sgreement ifring the smount 0r compsnssticn to which the sgent is entitled he cannot, ot course, recover any amount Honorable Julisn Montgomery, May 23, 1939,,Psge 5 in excess or that stipulated. 2 Tex. Jur., p. 610 2 C. J., 782 Seotions 2, 4, 10 end 11, when ccnstrutd to- gether. not to mention other eections or Article 66756, clearly indicate that the purpose of the'genersl law wss to rsise moneys for etste end county highway end bridge construction; to apportion the rsvenues between the Stste Highway Department end the County Road and Bridge Fund; end to provide compensation ior the County Tar Collector es sgent of the Bighwsy Depsrtment, irm which cclllpensetionnecesssry expenses oould be paid. A ccnsiderstion ci the caption of H. B. NO. 6, chapter 88, Acts 1929, Forty-first L#gislstum, Second Called Session, p. 172. substsntistss this construction We quote it ln pert: "An Act providing rcr the construction malntensnce. regulation, and eupenision of the public highwsys of this State, by providing revenue therefor, by regulating, supervising, and licensing of motor ve- ~1018s used on esms. and the payment cl 1icenseYees on such motor vehicles, end the distribution and apportionment or euoh license fees; regulsting the duties and ccapenssticn or Tax Collectors in connection with the oo11sction oi said lioense isea....; providing for the sp- propristion end use of ttb revenues ool- lected hereunder...." Seation 10 relating to apportionment or funds, section 11 relating to the fees or TSX Collector end section 12s relating to duplicate license reoeipts, of Artiole 66758, 611 stand es originslly enacted by the Forty-first Legislature, second Called session. AH.8 1029, Chapter 88, p. 172, H. B. DO. 6. Construing the sections together, YB reach the opinion that it ws the Latention or the Legislature that all revenues raised la the Aot in the form of fees were to go into the gross oo11ections fund ior weekly apportionment sitar the deduction of the fees sllocsted to the County Tax Collector "se ccapsnsstion for his services"; and that 611 net funds (grose Nods minus Tax Collector18 ieee) raised pur- susnt to the statutes which were not speciiicslly apportioned to the County Road and Bridge Fund under Seotion 10 of the Act be remitted to the State Eighwsy Department. The ancant of the County Tax Collector ie to receive is plainly etipulsted in Section 11. It is a delinite, certain. easily determined amount, deductible weekly rrcm the gross ccl- lections meads pureusnt. to the Act. Seotion 12s dealing with duplicate lioense rs- ceipte provides for pawent or s fee of twenty-five oents for the duplicate to the State Highway Department or the cant* Colleotor. The duplicate license fees paid to the i Bonorsble Julian Yontgmery, May 23, 1939, Page 6 County Tax Collector, become s pert of the gross ccllec- tions fund unless it can be definitely shown that they sre to be paid to the County Tax COlleotcr es sdditioml ocm- penration to that reaelved by himunder Section 11. But it has been revealed that under 8eot1oa.11 the lees of s TSX Collector sre expressly defined and ere to be deduoted rrca the gross collections under the Act. It is our opinion that all bee collected by the County Tax Collector under Article 6675s srs psysble to the ccmmron gross oollections fund to be apportioned weekly un- der Section 10, and that fees collected by the County Tsx Collector tar the issusnce of duplicate license receipts le included. The dupliaste lioense receipt fees sre not to be retained by him in the ebsenoe oi epeeitic etstutory sutherizstlon lepeoislly since the amount or his fees is limited by Section 11. The etetutory fees provided for the Tax Collector under Section 11, however, 61% deduct- ible weekly Iran the ~camon gross collaotions fund. The csse 0r Bowie county v. bfcmrrie, et 61, (1937) 103 S. W. (2) 1062, is authority for our contention that the County Tar Collector does not retain the twenty- rive cent ice in the preesnt instance. In thie csee it wss held that the county was not entitled to any portion of e registrstion fee of three dol- 1srS payable to s County Tax Collector or any motor vehicle being driven under its own power, towed, or transported by being attached or coupled to em8 other vehicle iran or ;;f."gb this Stste over it8 higbwsys tar the purpose or , rsssle or trsds,in another state, etc. Bowl8 County sued its Tax Collector, the Bighwsy Ccmniesion of Texss, and the Stats Highwsy Engineer to sa- rorae payment 0r it or ritty (50%) per oent. less rees 0r collecting the three dollar regietration ccnvoy isa for the years 1935 an4 1936, under Article S27b, Section 2. Vernon*s Annotated Penal Code. Bowie County contended that the 1935 registrs- tion convoy fee sat should be construed in sri msteris with Article 66756, and that the fund raise rrcm the three dollar registrsticn fees ehould be spportioned between the county end the Stste Highway Wpsrtment in ecccrdsnce with Section 10 of Article 6675s. ! The court said it'did not egree with the county(s contention and then msde this eignilicsnt observstion: “SE ction 10 or tbs Aots Of lPP0, se vfemwn*m oLlapt.er/ mmoteted ststutee. Article 667&-10) has speciilc relationa to the division of fees authorized to be collected by that Act, between the eever- al counties and the stste, snd dws not srreot another speoiric rsgirtrstion tsx levied under the Actor 1935." Then the court held that the ress levied under the ACt 02 1935 were not spportionsble to the oounty. Theretore, they were payable to the State. e. Honorable Julian Montgomery, &?.y 23, 1939, Page 7 . "The presumption is that all taxes colleoted under general lsw not apportioned era payable to the state. Only such tsxes se are speciricslly apportioned to the several counties csn be legally paid to them." Although lt wss held the Act or 1935 wee nOt in par1 msteris with Section 10 or Article 66756, still Sections 10, 11 end 12s sre all psrts or the sane ststute enacted et the sems time ror the ssme purpose. One spirit end one policy is ccn- trolling. Under Article 6675s the gross funds collectable sre eubject totbeweekly deduction of the fess or the TST Collector se prescribed in Section 10, end theresiter to apportionment between the County Road and Bridge Fund end the Sighway Ds- pSrt.mSnt in accordance with the provisions or Section 10. The twenty-five cent fees collectsble under Section 12s for duplicate lioense receipts srs s part or the gross COlleCtiOnS under the Act. They do not go to the County Tax Collector es ress. The ACt. in Section 11, speciiicslly defines his fees. Nor do they go direct to the Righwsy Depsrtmsnt. The Highwsy Depsrtment only gets the balance of the net collec- tions after the County Road and Bridge Fund has been provided for . under Se&ion 10. Therefore, in snswer to your question, it is our holding that s proper construotion or Article 6675s forbids retention of the duplicste license receipt fees provided in SeCtiOn 12s by the County TSX Collector and also denies Sepsrsts payment b:r him of these fess directly to the High- way Department, but provides for tbdir payment in to the gross collections fund with all other fees collected under the Act. The twenty-five oent fees collected by the State Highway Depsrtment directly sre retained by it in the sb- sence ot any provision that it pay fees ecllected into the gross oollections fund, whereas the ssme fees collected by the County Tax Collector are co-mingled with other fess and come to the Highway Dspsrtmsnt through epporticmment under Section 10. This opinion has the eliact of overruling the ror- mer opinion on this matter by ASSiStSIlt Attorney General R. E. Gray, dated November 23, 1938, and addressed to the Honorable Cecil C. Rctsch, at thst time Assistant Criminal District Attorney, Fort Worth, Terss. Trusting that the above fully answers your inquiry, we are Yours very truly ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS BY Dick Stout AeSistsnt DS:FG This opinion hss been oonsidered in conference, sp- proved, and ordered recorded. Gersld C. Mann ATTCRNEYGENXRAL OF TEXAS