Honorable George H. Sheppard

Comptroller of Public Accounts AustLn, Texas

Dear Sir: Opinion No. O-3700

Re:Whether a speolalleed motor carrier license underHouse Bill 351, 47th Legislature, is liable for the intangible assets tax levied byArticle ;3&H~use Bill 8, 47th Legisor the gross receipts tax le&.ed inArticle 14 of said House Bill 8.

In your letter of June 17, 1941, you request our opinion as towhether a carrier holding a certificate Issued under authority of House Bill No. 351, Forty-seventh Legislature, is liable for the intangible assets tax levied byArticle .XIXIofHouse Bill 8 of the Forty-seventh Legislature, or the gross receipts tax levied 'byArticle XIV of House Bill 8.
By the express terms of said Artiole XIV carriers who are required topay an intangible assets tax under the laws of this state are exempted from theprovisions of Artiole XIV requiring payment of agross receipts tax. Hence we are immediately confronted with the question as towhether a specialized motor oarrier operatingunder a certificate granted by the Railroad Commission pursuant toHouse Bill 351 is required topay the Intangible assets tax levied by Article XIII. In the lastmentioned article it isprovided that each common carrier motor carrier operating under a certificate of convenience and necessity issued by theRailroad Commission of Texas, doing business wholly or inpart within this state, and every other individual, company, corporation or association doing business of the same character in this State, in addition to the ad valorem taxes on tangible properties which are or may be lmposed,upon them respectively by law shall pago= annual tax on their intangible assets andproperty. the specialized motor carrier oome within the definition of_-

Honorable George H. Sheppard, Page 2,O-3700

those affected byArticle XIII? In our opinion, It does. A reading of House BillNo. 351, Forty-seventh Legislature, shows clearly that one operating under a certificate issued by authority of thatAct will be engaging in thebusiness of a limited common carrier, that Ishe will be a common carrier of certain designated commodities. The Instrument issued tohim is frequently referred to In the Act as a certificate of convenience andnecessity. Section 5a(a), Section 5a(b), Section 5a(e), Section 5a(g). As amatter of fact in Section 1, embodying the Legislature's declaration of policy, it Isdeclared tobe the policy of the Legislature "to create aclass of common carriermotor carriers designated as specialized motor carriers to engage in thebusiness of transporting" certain properties. Our opinion is that such carriers should be required topay the intangible assets tax levied byArticle XIIIbut that they should be exempted from thegross receipts tax levied in Article XIV. Presumably all such carriers will pay the intangible assets tax. We arenot now confronted with the question ofwhether a specialized carrier which for some reason isactually not required topay an intangible assets taxwould be liable for the gross receipts tax, andwe prefer not to attempt to answer that question until the taxing authorities are confronted with It.

APPROVED JULY 11, 1941
s/Grover Sellers

FIRST ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL GRL:LM/cg Approved Opinion Committee By BWB, Chairman Yours very truly

ATTORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS
s/ Glenn R. Lewis

BY GlennR. Lewis

Assistant