Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN emam c. Ia”” li-uIIuu :-*““w,c.IIoy ,..,...*^., _ -_,._- .- -- e#iAw~theroof, ahoYlagthe a gpto dMIIa Peoeiptr frea the salo of say 0 T ths above- .,a&mod itom for the quortornut pwcodlag; and uhrll lt t&o oaae tlmo pay to the 0 troller a luxury UOioo tax sqwsl to two ““pa) pardcauat& o&d ploor reoeipto u ohownby . l +e* Tto tu ng h wo la o h a ll ho o a u wwd 00 u to r o q u lP 0 p q lo Ent of th o ta x d) g r eo o P o o elp to h0wl.n l*oiod mro thm QIQOa the promedo of ths uls of tho au4 utiolo ef lwwohRblldl8e. Arot.allulouwedhereia,maMaMleto l a no x r y b uyo fez we 01 o o nwa p tlo n, and no t fo r c b eso mooipto of a o a lo M a lls th e la naM .& h th e g +ur c h a ap oa ry a , 01 r ip -p ees to p a y feP@af srtiole o??MawualtiJ bougtlt rt wail ” While it mar bo w&id that geaeml4 ths VoFd “olnn” lo wed to donote money, owh lo aot ~oasouUy lto mmaUa& The oeocQd-hmd utlolo t&m in OI a papt of tb plrrpohrs* prioe 10 xm lotlcmbl~ 8 pl;ct ef tha ~‘ipto$o$ pa- &o. It r 0 noted that in the tlzot o*r ltbetuiofix8dat~amunteqmlto r of ths ~gooso reoeipts” for ths sale of ths aw rrdto; It 0eeU aSthe* olou to us that to 00 ths vord “ova 8ousedlnthelut oe&ones of seotion fi the a ‘vdus~ vould oom namer oauporting to the int&it1a¶ of the Logiorrtrzre than to limit t&o mom&q of the roti to aey and allow the o&lo to go tu mo ln8otu u the pmhMe pldoe lo rspre0eat.d by gooda Instead of mtmoy. In OaQO a !bmsfe~ Tu k for l ta x ‘at th e r a te7o ? a & 6ny eliunoltia u- 5,ooo.oo up to tho mm of 50,000.00,” a Su=Qme'o gt;i”d,tho oaoe of In ro Xlletea t 8 Patrte, 1% S. I. 8. # “gko wo of the ro-tdo ‘aaeuat’ and ‘mm in the otatuto 10 uofortumte, a0 the00 wwdo US populbrlg wed to donot. wmey, but, U . suoh ?eoelpto, UUP a a o wP to ow Qwotim is th8t th s awlott up a a Yhlohthowvll1bo Jotllw*dQl the omof)1oo.06in t&e fact l1 tua t1ou?aaltted on b yy o u. YOU V-Y M Y