MP. Coke R. Stevenson, Jr. Opinion No. WW-816 

Administrator 

Texas Liquor Control Board Re: Whether or not Art. 667, 

Austin. Texas Section 23;(d) of the Penal 

Code permits the tax on 

beer to be refunded when 

such beer is sold to an 

Individual who has a contract 

with a National Military 

Establishment to operate a 

concession within the enclosures 

Dear Mr. Stevenson: of such establishment? 

We quote from your opinion request as follows: 

"Article 667, Section 23*(d), of the 

Penal Code of Texas, provides, to-wit: 

"'It is not Intended that the tax 

levied in Section 23 of Article II of 

the Texas Liquor Control Act shall be 

collected on beer shipped out of this State 

for consumption outside this State, or 

sold aboard ships for ship's supplies, OP 

on beer shipped to any installation of the 

National Military Establishment, wherein 

the State of Texas has ceded police jurlsdiction, for consumption by military 

personnel within said Installation, and the 

Board shall provide forms on which Distributors and Manufacturers may claim and obtain 

exemption from the tax on such beer. If 

any Distributor or Manufacturer has paid the 

tax on any beer and thereafter said beer is 

shipped out of this State, for consumption 

outside this State, OP sold aboard ships for 

ship's supplies, OP is shipped Into any 

Installation of the,National Military Establishment as referred to above, for consumption 

by military personnel therein, a claim for 

refund may be made at the time and in the 

manner prescribed by the Board or Administrator. 

So much of any funds derived hereunder as ma 

be necessary, not to exceed two per cent (2$ 3 
MP. Coke R. Stevenson, Jr., Page 2 Opinion No. WW-816 

thereof, Is hereby appropriated for such 

purpose. The Board may promulgate rules 

and regulations generally for the enforcement of this provision.' 

"This Department interpreted the above 

to mean that if the beer Is sold to, 

Invoiced to, or shipped to, and paid for 

by an installation of the National Military 

Establishment, where police jurisdiction 

has been ceded by the State, that the State 

tax exemption should be allowed. On the other 

hand, if this merchandise is shipped to, 

invoiced to, OP paid for by a civilian concessionaire who is operating for individual 

profit that the State tax exemption should not 

be allowed. 

- 

"The situation in question Is where a 

concessionaire who is a civilian and is not 

a memeber of any branch of the Armed Services 

of the United States has been granted a concession to operate a snack bar in a National 

Military Establishment where police jurisdiction 

has been ceded by the State, The beer is served 

at this snack bar located in a bowling alley. 

The bowling alley is located within the area 

of the National MlLltapy Establishment. The 

concession agreement provides that the concessionaire shall not sell the products, 

services., and merchandise of the concession 

to any person except those authorized to be 

present in and utilize the facilities of the 

bowling alley in accordance with applicable 

military regulations or directives now in 

effect, 

"In order to answer inquiries concerning 

the sale of tax free beer to an individual who 

holds a concession in a National Military 

Establishment, we respectfully request your 

opinion as to the following questions: 

"1 o Whether OP not Article 667, 23*(d), of 

the Penal Code permits the tax on beer to be 

refunded when such beer Is sold to an individual 

who has a contract with a Rational Military 

Establishment to operate a concession within 

the enclosures of such establfshment? 
Mr, Coke R. Stevenson, Jr., Page 3 Opinion No. WW-816 

c" 

"2. Or, is the criterion for tax exemption 

not whether the purchaser of the beer is a 

civilian, but, rather, whether or not the 

State of Texas has any jurisdiction over the 

place where the beer is ultimately sold? 

"These questions are not the subject of 

any pending litigation and your opinion is 

necessary in order that we may properly advise 

a concessionaire operating on a Rational 

Military Establisbment where the State of 

Texas has ceded police jurisdiction." 

A careful examination of the terms of Art.. 667, Sec. 2& 

(d), Tex.Pen.Code, reveals no basis for your departmental 

interpretation. It is not required that the beer be sold to 

a military Installation, but only that it be shipped tothe 

installation for consumption therein by military personnel. 

This proposition is clarified somewhat by reference to the 

second sentence of the questioned article, which states, in 

part: 

"If any Distributor or Manufacturer has 

paid the tax on any beer and thereafter said 

beer. D .is shipped && any installation. . . 

a claim for refund may be made." 

As pointed out by Attorney General's Opinion No. W-354, 

three requirements must be met before refunds may be made in 

cases of this nature: 

1. The beer must be shipped Into an installation of the 

National Military Establishment; 

2. police jurisdiction ever the Installation in question 

must have been ceded by the State of Texas; and 

3. the beer must be intended forconsumption by 

military personnel within the Installation. 

According to the facts set forth in your letter, all three 

requirements have been met, Accordingly, refund should be made. 

SUMMARY 

Under the terms of Article 667, Section 234 

(d), Tex.Pen.Code, the Texas Liquor Control 

Board should make refund of taxes paid on beer 

shipped to a civilian concessionaire within a 
Mr. Coke R. Stevenson, Jr., Page 4 Opinion No. WW-816 

military installation wherein police 

jurisdiction has been ceded where such beer 

is intended for consumption by military 

personnel within the installation. 

Yours very truly, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney General of Texas 

JNP:cm 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE: 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

William T. Blackburn 

John Lawrence Hargrove 

Robert A. Rowland 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

By: Leonard Passmore