OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Ronorabls Olvllle 8, cupaltar 

Chairman and lhmoutlve Dlreator 

Texua Un%mploym%nt Gwnponsation Cdeufon 

Aimtin, Texan 

War Slrr 

Vember 21, 1939, reion of uubreat4ona 

It+17 P%Tnon*~ Annofact 6ituutiw* whleh 

rstlan is ame by A. 

k of the Z 

0 that u 00rpor~th~ k&f&d&It snaftidUcli6 

in wup1oymwlt bukiag; the NT& nineteen weaka of 

1938, and that Z Go~at$,on had three illd%ti&Uti6 in 

tmiplapent during the whole of the peer 1938. 
Eonorabla C&d116 s. Carpd6r, mw 2 

During tho nineteenth week of 1938, A aoquIr.6 

the stock of the Z Corporation, and M Corporation reduces the number of individuals In Its 

WI loyraent to fly% and oontlnuea during the rema f nIng week6 ot the year with five lndlridaals 

In Its employment. Do bl and Z Corporation6 be- 

;;";" subjeot employers by virtue of Seation 19(f) 

, and, if 80, i&en?" 

Subseotion (1) and (4) ot aeotiac (f) of the 'Poxas 

T.Jncmploymcnt Conrwnsation Aot, 6ame baine Artfolc 5221b-17, 

6upra, reads, 'In part, 66 follow6: 

"(f) lDztployer' mean8 

"(1) Any employing Unit whloh~ Por soin% portion of a dny but not neOeS6arIly 6iElUltall%oU6lp, 

in each of twenty (20) diff6tcnt maks, whether 

or not suah woeks am or were aonaaoutlvs, wIthin 

either the CUrrent or the 

haa or had In emplojnn6nt I) 

ramdine calsnda~ year, 

% ght (8) or more indivlduals (Irresgeative of whether the SRT% lndiYidU416 are OF were sa~ploysd in each 6UOh dey1.t 

"(4) by employment unit whioh together with 

on6 or pore other %LNpl%ying !iIiItB, I6 Olrn%d or Bontrolled (by legally enforosabls mean6 or othsni6s) 

direotly or lndfreotly by the same Interest, or 

which owna or oantmls one or hor6 other %aploying 

units ‘(by leeally enioroeable m%an6 or otherwleet, 

and whloh, If traatsd aS a aIngle.unIt with auoh 

other employing unit, would be m emloyer tmdcr 

paMLgFaph (1) Of thf6 6Ub86otIOn; . . .* 

In the first raot altuation mantloncd In your lcttsri it la clear that eq%h Oogoratlon I6 6~ *6!ap~opIn?~ unit" 

afihin 6Ubseotlons (1) and (4) of as%tIon t,f) of ArtI%l% 

$i22lb-l7,~:~&upre. An %mployIng un1.t is derimd in reotion 

(e) ot Artisle 5221-b-17, as follow%t 

*'E#oying, tinItv means any Individual or 

type of or~izstlon, inoludlng a>y . .:'. oorparation, . l . which has or rubeequcnt to fanuary 

1, 1936, had in its %m$toy m.16 or mope indi-, 

viduals p~riomfne sorvioos Par it within t.b,fs 

&z&e.* 
552 

~mb-able Orville 3. Carpenter, Page 3 

In subseotlon (&), aupti, we Tin4 that two or 

mom er?:loyinc units are to be treate4 ss one If they are 

owzo4 or oontrolled by the eeme interest. The two ooFporatlons mentioned in your first faot situation, are 

owue4 or co&rolled by the sme Interest au4 together have 

ei,ght (8) or zore, inditldunls in their enploymnt. 

IJnder the provisions of subsection (1) of eeation 

(f) of Artlole 5221b-17, we find that the eight (8) or more 

employees nust have Men employed for some portfon of a 4ag 

but not necessarily simultaneously, in caoh of twenty (20) 

afsfort3nt wco!cs, whether or not such weeks em or were oonseoutlve, within either the current or yrsoeding year. 

In applyinK t!:ie above paragraph to your Tirst feat 

sibuatlon, we are of the opinion that it is 

the two aorporatlons, together, to hevo the 

more lndivfduels in their employment ior e 

(20) weeks, In the manner as spsclflsQ in said subrreotlon 

tl), beglnnlng from the time they were owue.4 or eontrolle4 

by the same interest and not prior to that time. 

Subaeotlon (1) of motion (f) provides that the 

twenty (20) weeka of em@oyment are those @within either 

the ourrent or preoediw oalenbar year." We oonetrue this. 

provision to mean twenty (20) weeks wholly within the current or the preasding year. slnoe there urs not twenty (20) 

weeks remeininc: in the year 1938 (subsequent to the fortyfirst waek), we oonolude that the two oorporations aantioned 

in your first feat sltuatlon are liable for taxes under the 

Texss Uumployment Compensation Act after the tenainetlon of 

the twent$eth (20th) week or 1939* esmmlng that there are 

eight (8) or more indlvldusls employad for a part of sash of 

the said twenty (20) weeks. 

In answering the.quest$.ons raise4 in your seaond 

faot situation we eoncluae that the two aor,orstione oome 

within subaeotiona (1) an4 (&) of seoti6n 

for taxes under se14 &?%%%I the 

(f f 

5221b-l7;!and are liebl 

termination of twenty r 

(19th' week of 1938. 

poret 1 

20) weeks subsequent to the nineteenth 

Thfa would make the two mentionea aorone liable for said taxes at the termlnntion of the 

thirtyAninth (39th) week of 1938 in the same manner and ior 
553 

ffanorable Orville S. Carpenter, Page 4 

the ssme reasons ea set out in the f’lrst faot sltuntion. 

iye wish to as11 yaw attontlon to tha fact that 

there is o varianoa between the~nunhcrs of the soot-ions of 

Artiole 522lh Vernon*.s Annotat@ Civil Statute8 and the 

numbered Seodons rsfofiad to in your letter. 2e have 

used the nUnbeF6 as sot out In Vornon'a .L?notated Civil 

Statut.68. 

Trusting that this is the Information desired, we 

remain 

Youra very truly 

ATTORN-EY G~ERAL OF TEXAS 

Glenn R. Lewis 

Aaal5tont 

Lea shoptew 

ATTORNEY GEI\'ERA-L OF Tz&$$