**OFFlCE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **QENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

**Hon. -0.**  **B. Shepprrd**  goaptavllet of Pub110 Aooountr **ACUtiB,** ?0=8 fear Mr. Sbeppudr

**We**are in reoei rhloh you enolosed a le willlanu, Dlreot Texas Unemployme Qepartneent Ir 60 Pub110 Aooounta to lsoue 8 wexrlat under the faetr re or the mm or $22.00, lr md that or yr. aa ofroot?

b350, V. A. 0. S., this departarent mqneet.8 your ruling as to whether **rrrrant** should irrue in payment of this **benefit** elaia of $22.00.c

$#& Ooo. IL Sheppard, pa&r2 .

*The **quertlon** oi offrrat 18 ralrad in the attaohd letter 

### iron thr Texa8 Unorrplo~arnt Compeasatlon Oomul8- 8lOU. Thlr deputment .nay not be dlreotly interested. in the question of offret In thla partloular elalm, but 8infJe the que8tlon arbor in oonneotfon with other olaima I will thank you to answbr that queetlon **aubmltted to**  thir 60sl

rtment by the Texar Unemployment Compensation oo~ralao 0a.e

*In oonneotlon with the attaohed oertlfloatlon for paraent of benefits to the above olalmant, wewish to 6iv8 you the fo~lowlng raotr 03nrimng our verbal afs01.~408 in 70~ 0rri00 4 rbw 64~8 agot “wehate a Judgment againat thir lndlrldual in thr amount OS&00.31, plurr aoarued lnterert and penalties. This amount ootera delinquent oontrlbutlone wbioh ho owedthir Commirsion in hi6 atatua aa an employor 8ubJeot to the Texas Uneaployment Oompensation Aot durlag the year8 1939 and 1940. filed an initial OnFebruary 9, 19b3, this indlridrul for W0.20. olaim for bsneiite whloh 18~ approved

*Ia rlew of A&661@4350, V. R, 0. 8.) reletin& to the dUtib8 of the OoaptrOll8r, 4d readlng, ‘WO uar3xh8 ahall **be**irrued t6 say pemon indebted to the State, or to his agent 

### or wdgaee, until ruoh debt Is paid,’ it eoourrrd to ua that it wa8 our duty to 0811 thlr matter to rour attrntlon and let you deolde the question. *Seotloa 15(o) of the Texar Unemployment Compensation Aot provider that no assignment, pledge, 

### or **enoumbranoe of**  any right to benefltr rhall br rali&; that ‘suoh 

### .right8 to beneritr rhall be exempt troa low, **ereoutlon,** attibhment, 

### or any other remedy whataooter proride& for the oolleotloa or debti andbenefit8 reoeltbd by any lndlrldual.
. , shall be exempt irom mf 

### remsly rhat6ooTer ior the oollsotlon of all debts.
. .* Shoe thla languagr indloate8 a olear logislatire intent that a olaimant’e right8 to benefltr ebould be proteotsd against akbmt any oontingenop, it ma7 hare eomebearing upon this oa#e. *.

### 209

X08. 6.0. IL mlbrpprra, peg. 3

WI via of the **faot** that the boert8 hrto rsoognltod the rl&ht of oifret undrr Artlols 4350 quoted above, we are also intsrsatod in thr we ma offset our olalm or 0usstlon a8 to whether or 8ot 400.5~ against thr mount ot bensrits 

## dwthl8 individual IAhi8 sapaoltr a8 88laima8t.” brtlole b350, 1. A. c. f-t., read8 as fOiiOU8l
90 warrant 8h0u be lssusdto any parson indebted tothe State, or to his agent or assignee, until Buoh debt is psl6.*
That the sontrlbutlonaprorlded for in the Texas Unemplornent Oompsnsatlon Aot are taxes *other than aih;::oren taxes’ isno longer anopen question in this State. dsnomlnated oontributionr, they are nonstheless **taxes.** ?riedman V. A~UIOM 8umty CO., 1518. wr (24) 570; Ia r8 llytilyrr, D. a., 31 P. Bupp. 977; Lallr v. State, 138 S. W. (2d) 1111.

Slnoo the item of )l+OO,51 **reooversd** by **the** Blat* against Frank Ed-rierdBenoit for delinquent oontrlbutlons (tares) **owing.by him**  **as sn**  employer, subjeot to the Texas Unemployment oompen8titlon Aot aurilig theyears 1939 ma 1940, 18 a tax, ths question arises as to rhether or aot this tax la a debt owhg thr State, or whether or not Benoit '18 B person Indebted to the State*, to USUIthe l xaot laaguege et the 8tatutr. That a state tax 18not adebt ln the ordinary aoaeptatioa of the tern ha8 **been**80 unirereall~ aooepted is our jurlsprudenoo that wo do not deemit necessary to site extended 

### l uthorltr. Thr tollowlnbj 04888 arr noted: Dollar Joint Stosk LandBank v, Elllr Oounty Levy Improrrmmt Dlstriet Bar 3, 558. W. (24) 227r **’** United **State8 v.**  motor, 266 1. 2721 Beo~ v. Tellsr ++. 196 ?. 6341 Forest Olty Yanufaoturl co. 77 P. (28 5u; ‘1.Ls+y,(Mo.) 3) 8. 1. (24) 9841 Boll v’

. Trosper, and 

### l nou& is quoted tror these earos’to support the aoespted fenoral rule that taxes are not debts or t&t one whoowe8 taxer 8 not indebted tothe Stat*. In the sase of Dallas Joint Stork L8and Bank ot Dal148 v, Blllr County L-errInprovelaent Blstrlot No. 3, supr8, the OOUrt 80idr
*Atax is not adebt intheusual and ordln~~ sense or the word. CTtl tit ix 01 D id OIA Ann 15,. l l 541, 3flgh. ~.“226~00~lt~~nv~~~:i0~~~a sd,)TO the rimm,err008 ir’tho holdlu Or tudgr t. 0,

gutohrron, r?r, while tudgb Or th. tdbrrl Dlrtrlot Court ei *hoXoustoa Dirfrtoa aou on thr 5th Olroul8 Ooart or ~ppoalr, u the

l m 0r md st8tas T. maor, roprrt “Th$t thd tax 18 not a d&t, and that lntrrert doer not arlrr u&on lt, unl.88 md rxobpt in reoor4anoo with t&r prorialoqr oi the rtatate, lr retOle4 

## brttmunirareal ourr*nt or r&thoklty; l 6 l a Jud@ Rutohoron oplnioo bl Tudgr **8aaborn,** fiotib~rurthrr 14th rpproral in an a Crcbtrer t. Ma&don,54 f, 431, in ths ronorring laaguq$*:

*Ten8 are not debtr, uprear or lrplled. Thor donot 

## rest upon oontraot, Thry are lmposod br the le Irlatlrr authority without the oonrmt rod egalnet the f w 11 or the prronr tar*& to aaintain the ~OTO~UJt, protoot tha right8 rndprftlleger of it8 rubjeotr, or to 

### l eooiapllrh some authorlced rptiirl purpo60, Thy 60not drew 

## intorest, l re not eubjeot t0 m-0rr, and 40 m depend ror 

## thrir rxistenoo orl

roroemant uponthe indlrldurl ars~t or thr 

## tarpryan.. The

## term‘dabt* In it6 ordinary sense doer not lnolude by oaeea from prrrtltdly l rory et&to br an l raml~atlon or lord8 b

It ioll~~ thea, that the tax due by hvnk Mwaob Bonoit, riotbring 6 **hbt, too8**  sot **oome**withidtbrpurview of Mlole L350, 1, P. 0. S., md ronmpue~tl~ rou wool& aot **bo** wthorisoa to wltbhola the lrausnoo or a warrant tohim for bonrt$ta to wbioh he might **be**lrgally ontitled la UI employee snder the Texas Unemployment Oompoaaation ht.

It rta;~ bothat our oourle will oonmtruo ho. 15, Sublivirioa 0, or the **Texar**VnemplofllPentOoaponaatioa Aot, ihioh HOSES a8 r0ii0*8t

.’.

No assignbbwit6 whioh aro 06 maybemmo dus or payable under this AOt shall be valid; an4 suoh rlshts to beneritr shall bo

Ub 6r0 sot tingled with sha 1 bb 6x0 I T other tundr of the rdplrat,

t iron say rewly whetrower ror the eolleotlon of al 

## debtrrxoopt debts lnourrod ror neoossnrlrs furnlshod to suoh lndlrlbual or his spouse or dependents during the tlmo Whsnsuoh lndirldnel was unemplopa(.. Ro waiver or any 

### l

remptlon provided for 1x1this subseotl'on shall bs talid.'

60 as to sword mteotion to a0lallRaat uador a state of ra6t6 rush as you sub9 t, but **we prorrr**  to base **our** opialoa **upon** the prinalples l

nounoob in the deolalonr to whleh wb hato rerarrod. We**brliwo** that our answer to thr rlmt question is also 6 8tiri0iOnt answer to the seoond quostiba as to whether or not the Stato woald harr thr right to oifsot its **judgment** against the $22.00 olrla or Rank lEdwax-penolt, rho ar an smplo~oo her alrraby **been**rdjudgeb rotltled to tbls sumor aonby. Wethink the ~6. of Dallas Joint Stook LandBank or Dallas v. lIlli6 Lsty Ilaprorrarnt Dlstrlot lfo. 3, supa, 1s aapla authority to hold la this State that thr ju&gmsat in thlr oass oannot br orrsst against the ocmpansatlon sla~mf ths eaplo~ss, Rank Bsnoit, ror it 11 srrsot holds that 6 l laim against the 8taOo or mniolpallty oaamt be ret orr against l tax doasasd, md obviously the oonverse or tbls would br squally true. fn the osso of Bibbard v. Oltik, 6H.3. 155, 22Aa. II. 4.42, it was hold under a statute in that stats whloh protided that where thorr arr l tual debts or demnndrb,rheea 0 piahtitr and th0 nmna~t at the the 0r the oorrrmenooment 0r the piaintirr*r 

### l otion, 0116dobt or demandmay**be** set 0tr against thb other, that the SWAO rhould not ba oonatrued to lnoluds tans l

serssed

by ltomrhlp, the truetoo, is a suit against the prlnolpal defendant, 10 that they PIJ be sot off against the euma dur rrom tho trustor to tha deiondanti.Boreoter, wobolirro that thebrord 166-o 6f

#$,, 15, Bubsortioa 0, of theT6xrs Unemplofrunt Oomprnratioa u$, 16 StifiOi.nt to PrOtOOt this MplOy~ 6~inst w 0161~ iorOffSet bY YirtUO er tho pId@WIt iOr taX66U&16t hi& fiwill b* Ob**nrd thaO thr laagaaqoot th16 69Ot1a ofthe 6t&ute p?OTideS that "rh6ll

## brMeapt fro8my rorrrbywh8t$on6f ror thr oollootlon or 6ll debto.. A oountorolrla or Seten 16 only another moth04 or rmody ot oollooting adebt, md ~66 itth6 t6x66 wore 66bt6 bi tb6 t6xpqor, whloh they ar, rot in the son60 hero Ooluldrrod, we are lnollnod tO the ~18~ that tha lU.@UgO Oi the l tatute

**QrOOhldO6 6ny**  aat **off or**  ~ounterolrlr.It tollows froa wbrt wo hare raid **rboro** that **IO** arr 6ttheOpi6106 that th6 Corntroller of Pub110Aroountg16not authoriredtowithhold the 466~61186 or aw8rruit to this lmPloyr.byVfrtUOOfArt1016 **43504** aad furthor that this 6lalr or UnemploymOntOOmpen66tiO6iairLcrano6oannot **bo** OrrS@t 6g6166t tbo judgment ior t6xos 6&66t himrhllr howalian mployar, &rr the Tex66 Unoaplopaont Ooep6n6rtlon Aat, 'lerytruly your6

l