_ - R-379 

May 8, 1947 

Han, C, E, Patterson Opinion No. V-193 

County Attorney 

Brewster County Re: Taxation of wool in govAlpine, Texas ernment warehouses on 

consignment from rancharc, 

Dear Mr. Patterson: 

You present for the opinion of this Department in your letter of April 15 1947, the question of 

whether or not wool in Federal bovernment Warehouses ao 

of January 1st is oubject to ad valorem taxes for that 

year; and, if 80, upon whom the duty rests to render 

and pay the taxes, i.e., whether the rancher who produced and consigned the wool to the warehouse or the 

warehouseman. 

-ðer the wool under.the circumstancea covered by your letter is the property of the producer, 

the rancher, or the government warehouse involve8 an 

issue of fact which is beyond our province to pass upon 

and which we will not attsrpt tom resolve. We will aosume, however for the purpose of this opinion, that 

the wool remains the property of the producer until it 

is appraised and in fact sold at a price mutually agread,upon betweenthe producer and the Federal Government. 

Based upon this assumption, we are'of the opinion that until such oale is consummated the wool remains in the hands of the producer and is a farm product 

specifically exempt frem taxation by virtue of Article 

VIII, Section 19, of the State Constitution adopted in 

1879, which reads as follow&: 

'?Farm products in the hands of the producer, and family supplies for home and farm 

use, are exempt from all taxation until otherwise directed by a two-thirds vote of all the 

members elect to both houses of the Legislature. 

(Set, 19, Art, 8, adopted election first Tueo- ' 

day in September, 

1879eIW 

1879; proclamation Octcber 14, 
Hon, CO E, Patterson - Page 2, v-193 

We think that wool does constitute a "farm 

productt', and its storage in a government warehouse 

pending ultimate sale does not preclude its being "in 

the hands of the producereD 

Literally 

tivation of the soli. 

farming means the tillage or culBut., as said by the court in the 

-e,o;p;r;tJw~~ & jJq$$ f$yy~ @fag;"" 

l%ike many words 'compoundld of differ&< &.ements it 

has the meaning of its own broader than that of thi 

elements considered separately; for from time immemorial 

it has been regarded as synonymouc with husbandry and 

the soil and the 

in the crops and 

earliest7ZFeZ7 

We continue to quote from this case as follows: "But, where the milk sold is produced by cattle 

kept on the farm as a part of its operation, the busineas of produc 

9 

and selling it lo necessarily an agriou1tura.l. pursu t, for the production of milk from 

cattle which consuma,the cropo grown on the farm ie as 

duction and sale of wool is producing an agricultural 

or farm product. Ao long es such wool remains unsold 

by the ranchman it is a farm product in h a hando'and 

as such is specifically exemnt under the. 4- oregoing provision of thi) Constitution. - 

The Legislature has never by two-thirds vote 

of all members of both Housea imposed a tax upon farm 

products "in the hands of the producerno 

This constitutional exemption from taxation 

would not apply, to wool that has passed out of the hando 
Hon. C. E. Patterson, Page 3, V-193 

of the producer by sale or otherwise, for it is exempt 

only "in the hands of the producer". If in fact the 

wool has passed out of the hands of the producer by 

sale to the Federal Government, then it would not be 

taxable unles~s Congress has specifically permitted the 

State to tax it. The State has no authority to tax 

property owned by the Federal Government so long as it 

insists upon its immunity. 

If we assume that there has been a completed 

sale and thewool has in fact become the property of the 

Federal Government and as such continued in storage in 

the Federally owned warehouses? we know of no Congressional action waiving the immunity of the Federal Government from State taxation under such circumstances. 

If, however, a sale of the wool has been made 

to a purchaser not itcelf entitledt o claim immunity 

from taxation a different rule would apply and tax 

liability would begin as in the 

sonal property, for it would no 

of the producer" as provided,by 

19 of the Constitution. 

case of any other perlonger beninthe hands 

Article VIII, Section 

SUMMARY 

Wool stored in Federal Government warehouses by ranchmen, but not actually sold, is 

specifically exempt from ad valorem taxes by 

virtue of Article VIII Section 19 of the Constitution of this State, as a farm product in 

the hands of the producer, If it actually has 

been sold to the Federal Government, it is not 

subject to ad valorem taxes by this State, in 

;;e absence of Congressional action permitting 

. 

Yours very truly," 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

Assistant 

. . 

..s ( 

,. 

.:. 

LPL:lh:jm