May 12, 1947
Hon. George H. Sheppard Opinion No. V-180
Comptroller of Public Accounts
Austin, Ttxaa Rt: Proper procedure to be
followed in making a
supplemental asstss-
ment on any land for
years prior to the time
such land passes into
the ownership of a ptr-
son who is a bona fide
purchaser for value with-
out notice of such fact.
Dear Sir:
You request the opinion of this Department upon the
question presented to you by Honorable James C. Martin, County
Attorney of Nuects County, in hir lttttr of March 18, 1947. We
quote below Mr. Martin’s letter covering the factual basis upon
which our opinion is requested. This letterfollows:
“Mr. Dub Allen has referred to me your letter
dated March 12, 1947, concerning the right of the
Tax Collector to assess and collect taxes on land
for years prior to the time at which the present
owner acquired title to such land. (There has been
a salt of the land in question to a bona fide pur-
chaser for value without notice of the fact that the
land had not been asstsaed for prior years.) The
discovery was made recently that the land had not
been asses&d and was not on the tax rolls. The
property owntr is willing to pay for the years dur-
ing which he has owned the land but refuses to pay
taxeo for those years prior to the time he purchased
the land, not then having any notice of the fact that
there had been no taxes theretofore paid on such
land.
“The basis of his contention is the last stn-
tence of Article 7346, which reads as follows:
“‘No rt-assessment of any property shall be
held against any innocent purchaser of the same if
the tax records of any county fail to show any as-
sessment (for any year so re-assessed) by which
.., ... Hon. George H. Sheppard - Page 2 Opinion No. V-180
8aid property can be identified and that the taxes
art unpaid.’
‘If this article is given effect how can we make
a supplemental lsstssmtnt on any land for years
prior to the time at which such land passes into the
ownership of a person who is a bona fide purchaser
for value without notice of such fact? ”
The above
quoted atnttnctfrom Article 7346, V.C.S.,
must be read together
with Article 7347, V.C.S., in arriving at an
anmwtr to your question. The pertinent portion of Article 7347 is
am follows:
*a
. . . provided,that the certificate of any tax
collector given during his term of office that all
taxes have been paid to the date of such certificate
on any certain piece of property, which is fully dt-
lcribtd in such certificate, or if the tax rolls of
any county fail to show any assessments against
such property sufficient to identify it, and that the
munt was unpaid at the dates such rolls may have
been examined to ascertain the condition of any
property as to taxes unpaid, this shall be a bar to
any rt-assessment of such proRerty under this law
for any years prior to the date of .such certificate,
or such examination; provided, that the property rt-
ferred to. when re-assessed, shall be held by an in-
nocent purchaser, who has relied upon the corrtct-
ness of such certificate, or the tax rolls heretofore
referred to.”
Careful reading of the full text of the above Articles rt-
veals that they were passed in a single bill (Chapter 130, 29th Leg-
islature) to provide a method for two things, as follows:
1. Assessment and collection of taxes on real
property omitted from the tax rolls.
2. Rt-assessing and collecting the tax on real
properties on which former assessments are In-
valid.
Careful reading of the above quoted provisions relating
to innocent purchasers reveals that they do not relate to property
omitted from the rolls, but relate solely to property on which as-
sessment was attempted and which is being re-assessed because
the original assessment was invalid.
If the property was omitted from the rolls and never as-
sessed, naturally a search of the records would reveal no payments
.
c
Hon. George H. Sheppard - Page 3 Opinion No. V-i80
and no facta that could lead a Tax Assessor-Collector or pur-
chaser to balieve payments had been made. The search itself
would put a purchaser on notice that the property had been omit-
ted from the rolls and that the taxes had not been paid. An As-
stsaor-Collector’s ctrtificata to the contrary would not bind the
State against the true facts. Obviously, it was for these reasons
that the Legislature gave no “innocent purchaser’ protection in
the cast of property entirely omitted from the tax rolls.
In the case of re-assessment of property once on the
rolls (but under invalid assessment) the Assessor-Collector or
the purchaser may have been misled and caused to believe from
the existing invalid assessment that no unpaid asstssmtnt was
outstanding. It is in this cast that “innocent purchaser” protec-
tion is afforded. Even in such cast, a person cannot be an inno-
cent purchaser and thereby prevent re-assessment unless the
facts show that on or before the date of purchase he had a proper
tax certificate showing payment, or (1) that upon examination by
himself or his agent or legal representative the tax rolls of the
county failed to show any assessment against such property suf-
ficient to identify it; and (2) the tax rolls failed to show that the
taxes were unpaid at the date such rolls were examined to as-
~‘ctrtain the condition of any property as to unpaid taxes. It must
further appear that one claiming to be an innocent purchaser rt-
lied upon the correctness of the tax roll which failed to show as-
sessments against such property sufficient to identify it, and which
failed to show that the taxes were unpaid at the date such rolls
were examined.
Except in this limited scope one cannot be an innocent
purchaser as to ad valortm taxes accruing prior to the purchase.
Whether or not such a purchaser is entitled to rely upon this stat-
utory provision involves, in any event, factual determinations; and
unless he is able to show all of the factual conditions prescribed
by the statute. he cannot be an innocent purchaser.
The Commissioners’ Court may proceed with rt-assess-
mtnt of such property in accordance with the statutes relating thtre-
to until such time as it finds from the facts that before purchase of
the property the purchaser examined (or had examined) the tax rolls
and that such rolls failed to show unpaid assessments against the
property sufficient to identify it and that he innocently relied upon
the correctness of such tax rolls as to no unpaid taxes being due.
In no event are you prohibited from making a supple-
mental assessment roll on property entirely omitted from the rolls.
SUMMARY
Articles 7346 and 7347, V.C.S., providing for as-
sessment of property omitted from the rolls and re-
asstssment of property mvafidly assessed, gives
.!I::, Hon. George H. Sheppard - Page 4 Opinion No. V-180
“innocent purchaser* protection under certain con-
ditions in casta of rt-asstssmtnt but not in casts of
supplemental assessment of property entirely omit-
ted from the tax rolls. In casts of re-aasessme,
nfact conditiona must be shown to exist &fort Com-
missioners’ Court is justified in not rt-assessing the
property.
Attorney General of Texas
EL,lh/.l
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion