## QBffice of tip Elttornep @merat

DAN MORALES .ATTORNEY CLNERAL 

## &ate ofQLexae

December 22, 1992
Honorable John Sharp Comptroller ofPublic Accounts State ofTexas L. B. J. State OfficeBuikihtg 111Bast7thstreet Auatin, Texas 78774 Opinion No. DM 192

Re: Betimd of franchise tax collections to banking corporations, and related questions (RQ-2127)

Dear Mr. sharp:

You have asked several questions concerning retimds of franchise tax owed to banking corporations or their successors. The franchise tax was 6rst imposed on banking corporations in 1985, a&r the United States Supreme Court invalidated the method used by most Texasjurisdictions to value bank stock for purposes of ad valorem taxation. See American 

### Bank & Tmti Co.v.Dallas Cow@, 463U.S. 855 (1983). To replace the ad valorem tax revenues lost to local taxing units as a result of this decision, the legislature l&d the ad valorem tax from banking corporations and subjected them to the franchise tax imposed by chapter 171 ofthe Tax Code. Acts 1984,68th Leg., 2d C.S., ch. 31, art. 

### 3, pt. B, 8 1, at 212 (repealing Tw Code 8 171.078, which had exempted banking wrporations gem the franchise tax). The same enactment established the local govemment corporate banking franchise tax fund, to which revenues 6om the franchise tax on banking corporations were to be deposited, for allocation to local taxing units. 

### Id. Q8, at 213-14 (formerly coditled at V.T.C.S. art. 4366e (1925); recodified as Gov’t Code 8403.105). The provision establishing the local’govemment corporate franchise tax fimd, which had been codiied as section 403.105 of the Government Code, was repealed in 1991. Acts 1991. 72d Leg., 1st C.S., ch. 5. 0 8.24.’ Jn the same enactment. the legislature amended section 171.401 ofthe Tax Code to require the deposit ofall franchise tax revenues inthe general revenue fund. 

### Id. 68.231.
Afkr banks became subject to the franchise tax, a series of judicial decisions adverse to the state on application of the franchise tax to other kinds of corporations required extensive tax refunds and credits. See, e.g., Srare v.

### SunRef. &Mktg.,Inc., 740 S.W.Zd 552 (Tex. App.-Austin 1987. writ denied); 

### Bullock v. Sage Enew Co., 728

‘Althoughformu rcction 403.105

oftk Govanmcntccdcbasbearcqcalcd,forbmitywcwill lCfCItOthiSptOViSlOlIbythC Govemmtccdooitation,rathorthanbycitingthosasionlawthatadoptod it.

p. 1011Honorable John Sharp - Page 2 (DM-192)

S.W.Zd 465 (Tex. App.-Austin 1987, writ refd n.r.e.),s Because the adverse franchise tax decisions apply to banking corporations in the same manner that they apply to the other corporations, your 05ce has determined that banking corporations are entitled to substantial tax re8mds or credits against ti~turetaxes. Most ofyour questions relate to the tax retimds or credits; however, you tirst ask whether the provisions authorizing the distribution of 8anchise tax revenues to local taxing units are consistent with article III, sections 50and 51ofthe Texas Constitution.
Article JJI, section 51 ofthe Texas Constitution, provides inpart: TheLegislatureshallhavenopowertomakeanygrant...of public moneys to any individual, association of individuals, municipal
or other corporations whatsoever.

. See ulso Tex. Const. art. JII, 550 (prohibits loan of the state’s credit “to any person, association, or corporation, whether municipal or other.

. .“).

You ask whether these provisions are violated by the disbursement to local taxing units of the state 8anchis.e tax imposed on banking corporations. As already pointed out, section 403.105 of the Government Code, the provision that formerly authorized this disposition of the 8anchise tax revenues, has been repealed. Acts 1991, 72d Leg., 1st C.S., ch. 5, 0 8.24. Thus, your question is relevant only to d&ibutions of the tax that weremadeinthepast.
Sections 50 and 51 of article III prohibit the legislature from making gratuitous donations to individuals, asso&tions, and all kinds of corporations, including municipal and political corporations. Rand 

### Dist.No. 4, Shelby Cow@ v.Allred, 68 S.W.Zd 164 (Tex. 1934). However, they do not deny the legislature.the power to use state funds for 

### govcmme& purposes. Statev. Ci@o/Austin, 331 S.W.2d 737 (T’ex. 1960). The state may allocate state funds to political subdivisions to use in carrying out duties that properly rest on the state. 

### Jefferson Count v.BoardofCow@ &Dist.RoadImkbtehess, 182 S.W.2d 

### 908(Tex. 1944);seeah SanAntonioRiverAuth. v.Shepperd,299 S.W.Zd 920 (Tex. 1957). Franchise tax revenues distributed to taxing units3 under section 403.105
~frPnchisctaxir~onthvPluedtbcprivilegeoT~budnasinT~, Bulkk v. Nonon Bancshores Corp., 584 S.W.2d 268 (Tar. 1979). ti isbasedupolltbccorporstion’r taxablecapital. Tax Code 00 171.002.171.101.Tk cues, takento@cr, bzld thatthecomptroUdr meuKdforlktemh@whatwnstitotaitaxablecapitalwas-

“%%ing unit”nwaosa aalaty, iauaporatcdcity,schooldiuric&countyeducatioodistrict a rpedsldirtridorautbority(arhisrbospitaldisbid,rwatcrdirtrid,arfirrprrvcntiondirtrid),or~ otkrpoWcaluaitoftbcstatcthatimposesdvPlonm~mpropcrty. G0~?code~403.103(@0(); Tax Code0 1.04(12).

p. 1012Honorable John Sharp - Page 3 (DM-192)

could be used “only by the taxing unit and only for public purposes.” Gov’t Code 5403.105(i). The staMe set out specitic purposes for which municipalities, counties, and school districts each could use the funds, purposes which were proper for the state aswell
as the local taxing unit to carry out! For example, former section 403.105(j) provided that franchise tax revenues distributed to a municipality could be used only for the foUowingpurposes:

(1) payment of &ties and beneths of municipal law enforcement 

### 05ccrs having a duty to enforce or engaged in the enforcement of state law; (2) payment of salaries and be&Its to municipal fire-fighters having a duty to protect or engaged in the protection of state or wunty property, including public roadways and rights-of-way for public roadways; (3) purchase of law enforcement and fire-fighting equipment reasonably related to the services provided to the state under Subdivisions (1) and (2); 

### (4) aquisition of rights-of-way for, and the construction and maintenance of. municipal streets that provide access to and departure from the state highway system; (5) provision of health protection services, including the removsJ and disposition of hazardous and solid wastes, and disease prevention services; and (6) protection of the public safety through the adoption and enforcement ofbuilding codes. 

### Id. Q 403.105(j);seealsoid. 8403.105(k) (school districts mayuse money to wmpensate employees and to maintain schools and school district property), (I) (wunties may use money to wmpensate law enforcement personnel involved in enforcing state law). In Our opinioq the disbursement of franchise tax revenues to local taxing units pursuant to section 403.105 of the Government Code did not violate article IIJ, section 51 of the Texas Constitution.

p. 1013Honorable John Sharp - Page 4 (DM-192)

We will next address your third, fourth, tX.h, and sixth questions,’ which wncern the sources of statutory authority for retimding overpayments oft?anchise taxes to banks. You ask how to reconcile the wmptroller’s general authority to give refunds under section 111.104 of the Tax Code with the authority under subsections (e) and (0) of section 403.105 of the Government Code to give credits and make regmds t+om the local government corporate banking franchise tax tkd. Section 111.104 of the Tax Code, which provides for tax credits and refunds, states inpart:

(a) If the comptroller finds that an amount of tax, penalty, or interest hasbeen unlawtkUyor erroneously wkcted, the wmptroUer shall credit the amount against any other amount when due and payable by the taxpayes from whom the amount was wllected. The remainder of the amount, if any, may be refunded to the taxpayer from money appropriated fortax refund purposes.

. . . 

### (e) Thissectionapplies to all taxesand license fees collected
oradministeredbythecomptroller. ~mphask added.]
Former section 403.105 of the Government Code created the “local government corporate banking ftanchise tax fund” in the state treaamy. Gdt Code 0403.105(a). Subsection (e) of section 403.105 required the wmptrolkr to send each taxing unit its share ofthe banking corporation tbanchisetax. It fiuther provided inpart asfollows:

The wmptrolla may retain in the local government wrporate banking franchise tax tknd a portion not to exceed five percent of each taxing unit’s share and mqy use 

### thisamounttomakerefundsof overpaymentsma& to thefund and redeem dishonored checks and drafts deposited to the credit ofthe fund. [Emphasis added.16 This quoted language of former section 403.105(e) shows that a reknd fkom the local government corporate banking fkanchiisetax fund was one legal remedy available to a banking wrporation inthe event ofan overpayment offinnchise taxes.

p. 1014Honorable John Sharp - Page 5 (DM-192)

Subsection (0) of section 403.105 ofthe Government Code provided inpart: Should it be determined that taxes assessed under Chapter 171, Tax Code, have been unlawfblly or erroneously wlkcted gem a banking wrporation (or its predecessor by merger, wnsolidation, or transfer of assets), then rhe knking 

### cotporation may...make an irrevocableelection to either 0)pursue legal remediIes other than taking creditsagainstcurrentor fiture taxes;or (ii)

fire with the &mpWoIlera clpinr

for a creditfor all amounts unknvfil& or erroneous&collectedagainstcurrentor frrturetaxespayable bythe banking corporation under Chqter 171,

. .Tm Co& The comptroller shall, on behalf of the state and the taxing unit& receive and administer all such claimsfor credit f&d bybanking corporations for taxes assessed against banking corporations under Chapter 171, Tax Code, and shall verify credits claimed for such taxes that have been unlawfblly or 

### erroneously wlkcted. Any credit shall be deductedfromthe tax dueby the banking corporation in the manner specSed in this subsection..

. If the amount of uniawtblly or erroneously wllected tax exceeds Sl.000, the portion of the credit deducted on the tax report will be (i) for the Srst tax report’ due following the veritication of such credit, 25 percent ofthe amount of tax unlawfully or erroneously collected, (ii) for the second tax report. .35 percent. ;(iii) for the third tax report. .40 percent

. . ;and (iv) for tax reported due thereafter, any part of the remain@ amount.

.which was not deducted as a credit on previous reports. [Emphasis added.] Despite the repeal of section 403.105, subsection (0) still has some etfect, according to the following savings clause included inthe repealing statute:



### (c) This article does notfleet the eligibility ofaperson to pursue legalremediesagatnstthestate,or toapp& for mtdreceive
a crea&, under Section 403.105(o), 

### Govwnment Code, es that section existed immediately before the effective date of this article, for taxes assessed under Chapter 171. Tax Code, that have been unlawfitUy or erroneously wkcted before the e&ctive date of this article, and the former law is wntinued in effect for that purpose. Notwithstanding Section 403.105(o), Government Code, as that section existed immediately before the effective date ofthis article, a locd taxing unit is not liable for taxes assessed under Chapter 171,

‘.4ma1rep,3rtingoffranchisctaxliahilityisrrquircd. TaxCade~ 171.202.

p. 1015Honorable John Sharp - Page 6 (DM-192)

Tax Code, that have been unlawtirlly or erroneously wllected before 

### the e&ctive date of 

### thisarticle. Thissubsectiondoes not @xt a claim

### fma refundfired orotherlegalaction commencedagain a local taxing unit before the e&&e date ofthis article. Acts 1991,72d Leg., 1stC.S., ch. 5, 58.27(c) (emphasis added).
Subsection (0) of section 403.105 requires the banking corporation to choose between filing a claim with the comptroller for tax credits or pursuing legal remedies against the state other than taking credits against current or fitture taxes. Under the savings clause, banking corporations remain eligible for these options, except that they may not claim a retimd from or initiate a legal action against a local taxing unit after the efkctive date ofthe statute.
In our opinion, the election under section 403.105(o) of taking tax credits against current or tuture taxes refers to the tax credits authorized by subsection (0). The subsection (0) provision for tax credits is a provision specific to the S-anchise tax and prevails over section 111.104 ofthe Tax Code, the earlier-enacted,* general provision for tax credits, to the extent ofinwnsisten9 between the two. Goti Code 5311.026(b).
If a banking corporation does not elect to take tax credits, it may pursue other legal remedies including the retimd remedy available under section 111.104 of the Tax Code. The bank’sright to seek rettmds is apparent fkomthe savings clause. The savings clause g&s local taxing units a prospective exemption t+om Uabiity for unlawtbUy or erroneously wUected franchise taxes, but leaves in effect “claim[s] for a re%nd tiled or other legal action wmmenced against a local taxing unit” before the effective date of the statute. This language shows that the legislature considered a claim for a refbnd to be a

“legal action” and thus a “legalremedy” available to abank under subsection (0).
Thus, abanking corporation may elect to take the tax credits offered by subsection (o), in accordance with the tax credit schedule set out in subsection (0). or it may elect to pursue other legal remedies against the state, including the remedy of Sling a claim for a retimd under section 111.104 of the Tax Code.9 Section 111.104, which applies to 

### aJl

‘ThpleduraofIcdios,403.105oftk cnwnmmtC4ldcw1p~inl984,~e~~a 9.1, while tbcpmiuaaor of section111.104 oftheTax CJJ&was adoptedin 1959. Acts 1959.56th Leg., 3dC.S.,ch. 1.at 187,194.

slider my inmpmtion of section 111.104of tbc Tax Code and saztion403.105of the GovanmntC4dc,a~should,rccordingtoduepromsw~~be~~toreamrtbc fullammmt

overpaid

tothestate

provided allstatepm arefollow& McKessonCop. Y.Division o/AlcoholicBewrages & Tobocw, 

### Dep’t ofBusi~~ssRegulation ofFlorkzia.4% U.S. 18(1990).

p. 1016Honorable John Sharp - Page 7 (DM-192)

taxes wllected and administered by the wmptroller, is a legal remedy within section 403.1OS(o). Thus, asto the availabiity ofarefund, the two provisions are not in wntlict.
The second question wncems the sources for payment of franchise tax refunds to banks. Until January 1, 1988, alI revenues of the &anchise tax on banking corporations
were distributed to local units of governments a&r deducting two percent for deposit in the wmptroUer’s operating fund and mtaining five percent in the local government corporate banking franchise tax t?md to refund tax overpayments and to redeem dishonored checks and drags deposited to the tbnd. Acts 1984. 68th Leg., 2d C.S., ch. 31, art. 3, pt. B, 37, at 213; see Goti Code 5403.105(e). The finnchise tax was increased ILS

of January 1, 1988, and the increase was credited to the general revenue fund.tO Acts 1987, 70th Leg., 2d C.S.. ch. 5, art. 2, pt. 1, 8 1. at 22. You ask whether retkds should be drawn from these funds according to the same percentage in which the tax was ailocated to them. This question involves a wnstruction of article V, section 30 of the current general appropriations act, Acts 1991. 72d Leg., 1st C.S.. ch. 19. a provision that appropriates money to paytax rethnds.
Article III, section 44 of the Texas Constitution prohibits the appropriation of money from the treasury to pay a claim, unless it has been *provided for by pm-existing law.” As we have found, section 111.104 of the Tax Code authorizes the wmptroller to retknd uniawfbUyor erroneously wkcted taxes “from money appropriated for tax refund purposes.” It ispreexisting law which authorizes the legislature to appropriate money for tax re8mds.
Under article VIII, section 6 of the Texas Constitution, “[n]o money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in pursuance of specitic appropriations made by law.

. .” The general appropriations act includes the following provision, which appropriates money to pay tax retknds:

1. Any money deposited into the State Treasury which is subject to re8md as provided by law” shalibe refunded from the iknd into which such money was 

### deposited, transferred, or otherwise

‘?heplwisionautborizingdishibutionoftllcfranchisctaxtolocal -~rcptalcd etfcuivchaamy 1. 1992.Acts 1991,72dLcg., 1st C.S..ch 5, 08.231.Tk m fnunthceanchisc taxisnow&positaltotbccreditoftbegmrPlrwawfimd. TaxCukp171.401.

‘IFor example,s&on 111.104 oftbc Tax Codeis a law pnwidiq authority for tbczdund of taxesunhklly er ermnmdy dkotcd. SeeatsaAustinNat7Bankv.Sheppard,71S.W.zd 242(Tcx. 1934);Attomcy rhncral opinirm WW-749 (1959) at 4 (common 46~ authorityfor lppropriationof mwtrom1&trrpsury).

p. 1017Honorable John Sharp - Page 8 (DM-192)



### crea?ted,and so much as is necessary for said refirnds is hereby appropriated.

. . . . 3. As a specific Umitationto the amount of refunds paid from fimds appropriated in this Act during the 1992-93 biennium, the Comptroller shall not approve claims or issue warrants for refmds in excess of the ~antount of revenue estimated to be available from the tax, fee, or other revenue source during the biennium according to the Biennial Revenue Estimate of the Comptroller of public Accounts used for certiiication of this 

### Act. Aty &aimorportion ofa claimwhichis inexcessofthis limitation shall be presented to the next legi&ure far a spec@cqprqvriation inor&rfovpigment to be made. This limitation shall not qply to any taxes orfees paid under protest. Acts 1991, 72d Leg., 1st C.S., ch. 19, art. V, 030, at 1024 (emphasis added). Prior appropriations acts have included provisions vhtually identical to subdivision 1 of section 30. See Acts 1989.71st Leg., ch. 1263,art. V, 930, at 5786.
Since the franchise tax on hanking wrporations was deposited into various funds, you inquire whether article V, section 30 ofthe appropriations act requires retbnds of the tax to be drawn from each such gmd at the same ratio in which the tax was placed in it. You inform us that it is the long-standing interpretation of the wmptroller’s office to interpret the above-quoted provision ofthe appropriations act inthis way. Webelieve that this interpmmtion is wnsistent with the language of article V, section 30 of the general appropriations act.12

APPROFlUATION

OFTAXREFUNDS. Asmucbeftherospa4htaxes c&ctedud-bythccomptrouer6smrybcacwsmryirhereby rppmpriatcdUtdrtlridclOpayRfuadE~pmvidtdbyhW,#UbjtCtlOtbC followiq limitaticms

awlconditions:
a. [tiIuelimitation6] b. [rdimdslimitedbyunountdrevuw e3timadteksvailablefortheux. bc+,oraba revemc-I. Aots1991,72dLeg.,lrt C.S.,cb. 19,ULI,at422-23.U&kclbcqqaiatien foundin se&en30of rrticlcV,therbove~ndoeollotpmvidcthatrefunb~kmadc~Uwfuadintowhicb tbelnoncywasdepo6itcd,lTwsf~erolhuwiwueditat. ThisrpproprLtionmoypmvidcawthcr xUIWoffaodstepeyrefimdsoffmncbiwtaxer.

p. 1018Honorable John Sharp - Page 9 (DM-192)

You suggested that franchise tax revenues placed in the wmptroller’s operating fund may not beused to pay Eanchise tax re&nds, because no statute provides for refbnds from that tImd. Express language authorizing the appropriation of retimds from the wmptrollerk operating fbnd is unnecessary, as long as no statute or wnstitutional provision restricts the purposes for which the legislature may appropriate that fund. See genera& Attorney General Opinion JM-321 (1985) (restrictions on use of wnstitutional highway lid). We find no statute or wnstitutionai provision restricting the use of the opera&g fknd. Article V, section 30 appropriates money for refunds from any timd to which money subject to refund was deposited, including the comptroller’s operating fknd.‘s
Your remainhg questions arise from the failure of banks that paid franchise taxes now subject to retimd. The Federai Deposit Insurance Corporation (hereit&er FDIC) became the receiver of the failed banks, taking possession of their assets and Uabiities, which were ultimately transferred to successor banks. You state that it isunclear whether the FDIC or the successor banks are entitled to the retimds of franchise taxes paid by failed banks, and that you have received many duplicate claims gem the FDIC and
successor banks for the same 6anchise tax refunds. You ask us to review the agreements by which the IDIC transferred the assets and Uabiities of fhiled banks to successor banks and to answer questions about the application of the merger credit authorized by section 171.1531 oftheTsxCode.

Your questions sevw nine, and ten are asfoUows: Under each set of documents, is the FDIC or ‘the successor bank entitled to any credit or refund owed the faiiedbank? Reviewing the documents submitted in Question Seven, which, if any, ofthe successor banks are entitled to the merger credit?
If you conclude gem the documents submitted that the successor bank was formed through any means other than a merger (i.e., transfers of assets, purchase or wnsolidation), is the successor bank precluded from claiming a merger credit under Tax Code Section 171.1531?

p. 1019Honorable John Sharp - Page 10 (DM-192)

You ask us to construe the agreements because their intent as to the mhntds of 6anchise taxes is unclear. This office, in the exercise of its authority to issue legal opinions, does not wnstrue contracts. I4 Where the meaning of wntract language is tmcehn, a court will hear evidence ofthe parties’intention in choosing the language. R 

### &P Enters. v.La Guarta,Gavreldt Kirk,Inc., 5% S.W.Zd 517 (Tex. 1980); 14 Tur. JUR. 3d Conrracrs 4 184, at 303. This office cannot evaiuate evidence or make fact lMittgs in the opinion process, and thus cannot determine the et&t of agreements between the PDIC and successor banks asto the disposition of the credit or refund owed to the tkiied bank, or whether the formation ofthe successor bank may be characterized as a merger for purposes of the merger credit under section 171.1531 of the Tax Code. Section 111.105 of the Tax Code provides for a hearing on the request of a person claiming a retimd under section 111.104 of the Tax Code. This might be.an appropriate procedure for resolving disputes as to whether the PDIC or the successor bank is entitled to retimds of6anchise tax wllected from failedbanks.

You also ask the following question: May the Comptroller offset claims of the State of Texas against
afailed bank on any retbnds or credits that maybe due?
Section 403.055 ofthe Texas Government Code provides inpart: (a) The wmptroiier may not issue a warrant to a person’s ifthe person is indebted or owes delinquent taxes to the state.

. .until the debt or taxes are paid.

.... Cg)Ifapersonowesdelinquenttaxesundaataxthatthe wmptroller administers or wUec& the wmptrokr may s&tract the delinquent amount from the total amount due the person from the state,.

. .and issue a warrant for the difUbrence. The delinquent person is entitled to written notice ofat least 20 days before the date

‘~~wdoaisnwopinionronibcauthority~aplMiccntitytoEmtrsctwitbrcspdto p6rtiwlarsubjectmttcrerteagrwtoapartiwlarwntrwtterm See,e.g.,AUorwyOwudOpinioas JM-65,JM-57 (1983);H-966 (1977);see ah Attemcy Oewral OpinitmMW-290 (1981) (dclcrmining ~dit0fsdutic6witbre3pwttefmwcialmmmcdowuidngfrnmalwscbyacamining ~g~~~lar~pmvirions). Suchqucsioascankanswadasanmtwoflaw,witinwtamsbinga amirauerrc6o~dirprtesa6tethcintalticmsdthe~.

p. 1020Honorable John Sharp - Page 11 (DM-192)

of the offset. The notice must conform to the notice requirements under Sections 111.018(b)(l) through (3). Tax Code. The wmptrokr may promulgate rules for the admbtistration of this aection. Footnote added.] This provision authorizes the comptroller to subtract the amount of delinquent taxes that a person owes the state from the amount ofa state warrant payable to that person and issue
a warrant for the difference. Thus, ifabank is entitled to a rettmd of gawhise taxes, but is delinquent in paying another tax administered or wUected by the comptroller, the comptroller may offset the delinquent taxes against the reknd warrant. For section 

### 403.055(g)to apply to an entity, it must be both entitled to the retimd warrant and liable for the delinquent taxes.
Section 403.055(g) ofthe Government Code does not authorize the comptroller to offset claims the state may have against a bank, other than claims for delinquent taxes. We have found no statute orjudicial decision authorizing a setoff of other debts owed the state by abank against tax retimds due the bank, nor have you directed us to any. In the absence of a statute authorizing such offsets, we camtot conclude that you have general 

### authorityto do 

### so. But seegenerallyStatev.Now, 422 S.W.2d 594 (Tex. Civ. App.- Corpus Christi 1967.writ refd n.r.e.); 

### Statev.Martin,347S.W.Zd 809 (Tex. Civ. App.- Austin 1961, writ refd n.r.e.) (once state vohmtarily files a lawsuit, defendant may tile wunterclaims wnnected to the lawsuit). Soction 403.055(a), quoted above, does require the comptroller to withhold warrants from a

### personindebted to the state untilthe debt is paid.

SUMMARY

Former section 403.105 ofthe Government Code, which created the local government corporate banking franchise tax fund and provided for its disbursement to local taxing units, did not violate section 51ofarticle JII ofthe Texas Constitution. Section 403.105(o) of the Government Code, which provides remedies in the event franchise taxes have been unlawfully or erroneously wkcted from a banking wrporation, remains in effect for some purposes. A banking corporation that is entitled to tax credits or a retknd for overpayment of 6anchise taxes may elect to claim the tax credits authorized by former section 403.105 or pursue other legal remedies against the state, including the remedy of Sling a claimforarefbndundersection111.104oftheTaxCode. Article V, section 30 of the current general appropriations act provides that money in the State Treasury that is subject to refund

p. 1021Honorable John Sharp - Page 12 (DM-192)

my be re-knded from the M into which the money was deposited, transferred, or otherwise credited. Article V, section 30 wnstitutes
an appropriation for the purposes of paying tax refunds. The comptroller interprets article V, section 30 as mquirkg him to draw m~dsoftaxfromeachfUndinthetreaPuryintheMmemtioin which the tax was deposited in the knd. This long-standing interpretation of ar&icleV. section 30 and its predecessors is consistent with the language ofthat provision. Section 403.055(g) pamits the wmptrokr to deduct the amount of delinquent taxes a person owc8 under a tax administered
or wkted bythe states from a state warrant owing that perso% and issue awarrant for the difference.

DAN MORALES Attorney General ofTexas
WILL.PRYOR Fii Assistant Attorney General

MARYKELLER Deputy Assistant Attorney General
RENEAHIcKs Special Assistant Attorney General
MADELEINE B. JOHNSON Chair, Opiion Committee Prepared by Susan L. Garrison Assistant Attorney GeneraJ

p. 1022