Hon. Robt. S. Calvert 

Comptroller of Public 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Sir: 

AUSTIN. TEXAS 

June 8, 1950 

Opinion No. V-1069. 

Accounts 

Re: The authority of the tax assessor-collectors in certain 

counties to withhold funds 

from State tax collections to 

pay the assessors’ salaries. 

_’ 

You request an opinion upon the questions presented in 

your letter which we quote: 

“Article 3937, Acts First Called Session of the 

41st Legislature, after setting out the commission 

rates to be paid to the County Tax Assessor-Collectors for assessing the taxes, reads in part as follows: 

““It is further hereby provided that from and after January 1, 1934, in the counties having a population 

of more than seventy thousand (70,000), inhabitants according to the last preceding Federal Census, the Tax 

Collector shall advance to the Tax Assessor, out of 

State taxes collected by the Tax Collector, such sums 

of money to be paid weekly, as may be necessary to 

pay the salaries of said Tax Assessor, but such sums 

shell not total, before the annual tax rolls are submitted by him to the Comptroller of Public Accounts, more 

in one year than 60% of the estimate for said year hereinafter provided for. 

““In counties of the class last mentioned on January 1st of each year the Assessor of taxes shall submit 

to the Comptroller of Public Accounts and County Auditor an estimate of State fees for assessing taxes for 

said year, which, if approved by said County Auditor 

and said Comptroller of Public Accounts, shall authorize the payment out of State taxes of the salaries in the 

next paragraph hereinabove provided; and at the time 

the Assessor of taxes submits his tax rolls each year, 

he shall be paid such balance due him from the State 

as shall be determined by the said Comptroller of Public Accounts and County Auditor and such balance shall 

be paid out of State taxes upon the warrant of the Comptroller of Public Accounts drawn upon the Tax Collector.’ 
Hon. Robt. S. Calvert, Page 2 (V-1069) 

,“Senate Bill No. 211, Acts of the 51st Legislature amended the Article wherein the Tax AssessorCollector is to now be paid higher commission rates 

than those provided by the First Called Session of the 

41st Legislature. The amended Article leaves out the 

clause authorizing advance commissions to be paid to 

the Tax Assessor-Collector out of the State taxes, in 

counties having a population of 70,000 or more inhabitants. The following sentence was added to the Bill 

enacted by the 51st Legislature: 

u ‘The Commissioners Court shall allow, the Assessor of Taxes such sums of money to be paid monthly from the county treasury as may be necessary to 

pay for clerical work, taking assessments, and making 

out the tax rolls of the county, (such sums so allowed 

to be deducted from the amount allowed to the Assessor as compensation upon the completion of said tax 

rolls); provided the amount allowed the Assessor by 

the Commissioners Court shall not exceed the compensation that may be due by the County to him for assessing.’ 

“Since Senate Bill No. 211 does not refer to advance commission being paid out of State taxes to the 

County Tax Assessor-Collectors in counties having a 

population of 70,000 or more inhabitants we have advised the Assessor-Collectors in those counties that 

we are of the opinion that they should not hold out the 

advance commission during this year. That fact is referred to in the enclosed letter addressed to you on 

Mar. 28th, by J. M. Williams, County Auditor of Tarrant County. 

“You will please advise this department whether 

or not the Tax Assessor-Collectors of the counties in 

question should refund to the State Treasurer the amounts they have withheld out of taxes collected, for 

the State, since Jan. 1, 1950, and whether they should . 

discontinue holding out the weekly payments in the future.” 

S. B. 211, supra, amended Article 3937, supra, so tha;t 

it provides higher rates of compensation to the assessor of taxes 

for assessing State and county taxes, and the same rates for assessing drainage district. taxes, road districts, or other political subdivisions of the county. 
. 

.’ 

Hon. Robt. S. Calvert, Page 3 (V-1069) 

Article 3937 which was amended in 1933 at the First 

Called Session of the 43rd Legislature, page 310, chapter 112, increased the compensation allowed assessors for assessing State 

and county taxes and left the compensation for assessing the poll 

tax at the same rate as fixed in the 1925 codification. This 1933 

amendment added the following provisions not theretofore appearing in said Article: 

“It is further hereby provided that from and after January 1, 1934, in the counties having a population 

of more than seventy thousand (70,000). inhabitants according to the last preceding Federal Census, the Tax 

Collector shall advance to the Tax Assessor, out of 

State taxes collected by the Tax Collector, such sums 

of money to be paid weekly, as may be necessary to 

pay the salaries of said Tax Assessor, but such sums 

shall not total, before the annual tax rolls are submitted by him to the Comptroller of Public Accounts, more 

in one year than 60% of the estimate for said year hereinafter provided for. 

“In counties of the class last mentioned on January 1st of each year the Assessor of taxes shall submit to the Comptroller of Public Accounts and County 

Auditor an estimate of State fees for assessing taxes 

for said year, which, if approved by said County Auditor and said Comptroller of Public Accounts, shall authorize! the payment out of State taxes of the salaries 

in the next paragraph hereinabove provided; and at the 

time the Assessor of taxes submits his tax rolls each 

year, he shall be paid such balance due him from the 

State as shall be determined by the said Comptroller 

of Public Accounts and County Auditor and such balance shall be paid out of State taxes upon the warrant 

of the Comptroller of Public Accounts drawn upon the 

Tax Collector.” 

S. B. 211, Acts of the 51st Legislature, omitted all of 

the 1933 amendment which we have quoted above, In fact, there is 

no r~eference either in the caption or the body of the bill to the 1933 

amendment. Reference is had only to the 1925 codification. Article 3937 as amended by S. B. 211 was copidd verbatim from the 

1925 codification except to increase the percentages allowed assessors for assessing taxes. 

Section14 of the 1949 amendment reads as follows: 

“That all laws or parts of laws in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.” 
Hon. Robt. S. Calvert, Page 4 (V-1069) 

We think the net result of this latter amendment to Article 3937 was to repeal all of that portion of the 1933 amendment 

with which we are here concerned and leave the omitted provisions 

of the 1933 amendment wholly inoperative as of the effective date 

of said bill, which was J.une 19, 1949. 

Therefore we agree with you that all sums of money 

advanced to the assessor in counties having a population of 70,000 

or more since the effective date of S. B. 211 was without legal authority, and hence should be returned to the State, and that all tax 

assessor-Collectors should discontinue holding out the weekly payments in the future. 

SUMMARY 

S. B. 211, 61st Leg,, amending Article 3937, V. 

C.S., which became effective June 19, 1949, repealed 

the prior provision of said Article relating to weekly 

advancements for the collector to the assessor in counties having a population of 70,000 or more to help pay 

the cost of assessing and collecting State and county 

taxes. 

Yourg very truly, 

PRICE DANIEL 

Attorney General 

:, APPROVED: 

W. V. Geppert 

Taxation Division 

By gcxd 

L. P. Lo ar 

Assistant 

I 

Charles D. Mathews 

Executive Assistant 

LPL/mwb