Bonorable Evans J. Adklns 

County Attorney 

McCulloch County 

Brady, Texas 

Dear Sir: Opinion NO. 0-5668 

Re: Taxation of land acquired by the 

State at tax sales held in accordance with the provisions of Article 7345b V.A.C.S. 

In your letter of October 8, 1943, you state ths,t certain land in your county has been acquired by the State of 

Texas at tax sales held in accordance with the provisions of 

Article 7345b V.A.C.S., and that this land customarily is sold 

by your sheriff at public auction after the expiration of the 

statutory redemption period. With reference to this situation 

you inquire: 

1. After the land has been purchased by the 

State, how should it be shown on the tax rolls? 

2. When the purchaser at the sheriff's sale 

takes title, is such title free of all back taxes, 

providing that the proceedings have been regular? 

3. Would the answers to the above questions 

be altered or affected by the fact that the land 

was bid in by the State for its "adjudged value" 

rather than for "the amount of the judgment snd 

costs"? 

In our Opinion No. 0-5506 we ruled that the purchaser 

at a foreclosure sale conducted in accordance with the provisions of Article 7345b acquires a title which is free of all 

liens and claims for ad valorem taxes delinquent at the time 

of the ,iudnment in the tax suit, unless such claims or liens 

are in favor of a taxing unit which was neither made a party 

to the suit nor served with notice of such suit. In the Fnstant situation the State is the purchaser at the foreclosure 

sale, and a subsequent purchaser takes title from the State 

rather than from such sale. Consequently, the aforementioned 

Opinion affords a partial solution to the questions here under 

consideration. The State as purchaser at the foreclosure sale 
Hon. Evans J. Adkins, page 2 o-5668 

acquires a title which is free and clear with respect to the 

taxes discussed in said Opinion; this title is in turn acquired by the person who purchases from the State, with the 

result that, with respect to the taxing units which were 

parties to the tax suit or which were notified of its pendency, such person acquires at the very least a title which 

is free from liens and claims for ad valorem taxes delinquent 

at the date of judgment in the tax suit. 

Another partial solution is afforded, by our Opinion 

No. O-3624, wherein we held that after the expiration of the 

period of redemption, land acquired by the State in tax foreclosure proceedings and held by it cannot be assessed for taxes. 

As a consequence of this Opinion we must conclude that a person 

who purchases such land from the State acquires, in addition 

to the title discussed in the preceding paragraph, a title which 

is free from all liens and claims for ad valorem taxes which 

arise subsequent to the expiration of the period of redemption. 

Consequently, if your second question is to be answered 

other than in the affirmative, such answer can be made only 

if it is possible for the land to become burdened with liens 

and claims for taxes during the two year period in which the 

original owner possesses a power of redemption. 

In our Opinion No. o-265 and, in subsequent Opinions, 

the tax immunity accorded lands held by the State after the 

expiration of the period of redemption was rested upon the 

principle that, absent a clear expression of intent, the State 

neither taxes its own property nor consents to its taxation by 

other taxing units. Property held by the State after the explratlon of the period of redemption clearly falls wlthin this 

principle; the status of such property prior to the expiration 

of the period is not so easily discernible, but if such property can be said to be "property owned by the State" or "property the title to which is in the State", it is apparent that 

the aforementioned principle will operate to preclude any liens 

or claims for taxes during such period. 

When the State bids in land at a tax foreclosure sale, 

the sheriff is required to "make and execute a deed to the 

State" and to record such deed in the record, of deeds. Articles 

7328, 7330, 7345b (7). Such deed stands as the strongest muniment of title to the property which it covers; "any such deed 

shall be held in any court of law or equity in this State to 

vest good and perfect title in the purchaser thereof, subject 

to be impeached only for actual fraud." Section 13 of Article 

VIII of the Texas Constitution; Article 7330. "The title to 

said property" is "held by the taxing unit purchasing same for 

the use and beneflt of Itself and all other taxing units which 
._ . 

Hon. Evans J. Adklns, page 3 O-5668 

are parties to the suit and which have been adjudged in said 

suit to have tax liens against such property." Article 7345b 

(9). As purchaser of such property, the State "acquires all 

of the title of both the plaintiff and defendant In the judgment" in the tax suit. 

730 (error denied.). 

City of Houston v. Bartlett, 68 S.W. 

Contrariwise, for two years after the 

foreclosure sale the original owner possesses the power to 

redeem the propert 

7 

and the right 'to possession thereof. 

Articles 7345b (12 7340; 40 Tex, Jur. 1 1 205, 206. The 

difficult task--the'task which will evolve a solution to the 

questions under discussion-- is to ascertain which of these 

bundles of powers, rlshts and privileges constitutes the holder thereof the "owner of the property for purposes of taxation. 

In 26 R.C.L. 1 290, the next-writer states: 

If 0 . . Lands bought in by a state at a sale 

for non-payment of taxes and held by the state subject to the former owner's right of redemption cannot be assessed for taxes while so held." 

Agaln in 26 R.C.L. 1 384, the writer sags: 

,I . . 0 While the details of the process of redemption vary In the different states, the procedure being of course entirely a statutory one, the 

methods adopted fall into two general classes. By 

the original method, which still prevails In many 

of the states, a deed was delivered to the purchaser 

within a few days after the sale, and the title passed to him subject to defeasance by redemption during 

the statutory period, which was commonly two years 

from the sale. During that period the purchaser remained passive, and if the owner failed. to exercise 

his right of redemption within the specified ,time, 

the title became absolute by force of the statute, 

without any further proceedings in court OP elsewhere to establish it. By the second method, which 

is now in force in a number of the states, the purchaser's title is inchoate and he receives no deed 

until the period of redemption has expired, and before the expiration of the period, he must give personal notice to the owner, if it is possible to find 

him, of the time when the right of redemption will 

expire and the amount which he must pay in order to 

redeem the property, and no deed Is issued to the 

purchaser and no title passes to him until this notice 

has been sent or it has been shown to be impossible 

to sent it........." 
Hon. Evans J, Aakins, page 4 o-5668 

It will be notlced that the method of redemption established by the Texas Constitution and. the statutes enacted 

thereunder falls~w1thin the first class above described. We 

aPe inclined to agree with the writer's statement that in 

jurisdictions following this mode of redemption, tftle to then 

property passes to the purchaser with the tax deed, such title 

being subject to defeasance during the redemption period. Tne 

power of redemption and the right to possession possessed 

the original owner are not, we feel, sufficient indLc%a of 

by 

ownership to justify the taxation of such person. During the 

period of redemption, title is out of the orlginal owner; to 

regain such title he must exercise the power which he possesses. 

Additioml evidence in support of this conclusion IS 

found in the statutes which prescribe the mode-'of redemption 

of property soid at tax sales~. Articles 7283 and 7345b allow 

redemption of property upon payment by the original owner, lnter alla, of 'all taxes. D a .thereafter paid thereon." The 

textwriter in 40 Tex. Jur. 1 201 has interpreted this provlsLon to refer to taxes "paid by the purchaser subsequent to his 

purchase." We agree with thfs lnterpretatlon. If It had been 

the intention of the legislature to tax such property against 

the 'original owner thereof during the period of redemption, 

certainly some verb other than "paid" would have been employed, 

for the use of this verb normally conveys the Idea that the 

original owner 1s to reimburse some other person for taxes 

which such person has paid, rather than the idea that the 

original owner himself is to pay such taxes as a condition 

of redemption. 

Consequently, we hold that the purchase by the State 

vests in it a defeasible title, which title 1s evidenced by the 

sheriff's deed, and that as holder of this title the State is 

the "owner" of such property for purpose of"taxation, If this 

be true, the property is not subject to taxation during the two 

year period, Your second questfon is therefore answered .in 

the affirmative. 

In reachi% this conclusion we are not unaware of the 

fact that our courts have occasFonally asserted that the original 

owner of property sola at a tax foreclosure sale possesses 

"title" to such property aurlng the period of redemption. See 

e-g., Bente v. Sullivan, 115 S.W. 350, 353 (error refused) 

and McGraw v. Potts, 27 S.W. (2a) 550. However, an examination 

of these and similar cases reveals that In each the court was 

employing the word "title" not in the strictly technical sense 

in which "title" is tantamount to ownership but rather fn the 

looser sense in which "title* Is but an abbrevfated method of 

saying that the original owner possesses a power of FedGmption 

and a right to possession. In none of these cases has a court 
-- 1 

Han, Evans J. Adkins, page 5 o-5668 

either declared or intimated that the possession of such 

power and right constitutes the possessor an "owner" for 

purposes of taxation. Consequently, we deem none of these 

cases to be determinative of the question at hand. ,Any contrary statements contained in our Opinion No. O-3624 are 

hereby overruled. 

In answer to your first question, you are respectfully 

advised that such property should be carried on the tax rolls 

as Fs other non-taxable property owned by the State. Your 

third question is answered in the negative; we se8 nothing 

either in the statutes or in the cases which would make the 

answers to your preceding questions dependent upon the method 

by which the property Is bid in by the State. 

Trusting that the foregoing satisfactorily answers 

your questions, we are 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By s/R. Dean Moorhead 

R. Dean Moorhead 

Asslstant 

RDM:fczwc 

APPROVED DEC 10, 1943 

s/Grover Sellers 

FIRST ASSISTANT 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

This Opinion Considered and Approved In Lfmited Conference