Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1898-02-03
LICENSE FEES OF INSURANCE AGENTS
Territorial Solicitor General Holds That the
License Law Of 1897 Repealed That
Of 1884 As to Insurance
Agents.

In response to request from the ter
ritorial auditor. Solicitor General Fall
has prepared and passed to the auditor
a somewhat lengthy opinion. in which
he holds that section of chapter SO OF
the laws of 1897 repeals section 1476 OF
the Compiled Laws of 1884 SO far as the
latter imposes upon insurance agents
any obligation to pay the license fee
thereby imposed, adding that the only
license which insurance agents are re-
quired to pay is the annual exaction Of
$40 imposed by section of chapter So of
the laws of 1897.
After quoting the two sections of the
law referred to, the solicitor general
says in substance:
These two laws impose license tax
upon the same persons, tO-wit: insurance
agents. They impose tax upon the
same privilege, that OF doing business
within the territory of New Mexico.
They impose license applicable in part
to the same purpose, t0-wit: the support
Of the public schools, the only difference
being that under the last law only one
half Of the fund goes to the public
schools, whereas, under the first all
goes to that fund.
1t is no answer to the position herein
taken to say that the license, imposed
by the act of 1884, is one imposed on the
company, whereas, that of 1897 is one
imposed on the agent. An even casual
reading of the law of 1884 will show
that the license tax thereby imposed is
upon the agent. Under this law the
same premiums may be taxed twice:
First, as part of the premiums upon
the amount of which the local agents
license is conditioned, and, second. as
part of the premiums going to the gem
eral agent, and upon the amount OF
which his license is conditioned. The
legislature of 1897, however, changed
this system, making all insurance agents
subject to uniform license of $40.
The solicitor general continues that
it cannot be answered that in one in
stance the tax goes to the territory and
in the other to the county. Both taxes
are imposed by the territory for the
privilege of doing business in the terri
tory, not for doing business in a county
or city. So both are territorial taxes
regardless of the disposition made of the
funds. If both laws stand double taxa
tion would result, which is repugnant
to reason.
But there are other convincing rea-
sons for holding the prior law repealed
In the law of 1897 the whole system of
taxation for doing business in this ter
ritory is consolidated. The law in
question repeals all conflicting laws and
this general annulment of former and
inconsistent legislation was evidently
considered so broad that saving clause
in favor of the laws imposing gaming
and liquor licenses was deemed neces-
sary. The fact that no reference is
made in this saving clause to the for
mer license tax on insurance agents is
significant as showing that the latter
law was intended to supersede the
earlier. The expression Of one is the
exclusion of the other. As insurance
agents" is one of the vocations men
toned in the act and as the act declares
that, while not repeating or annulling
the liquor or gaming laws, it shall APP
ply "to the business in the vocatiOns
herein especially mentioned" it is evi-
dent that the repeal was intended to
operate upon former laws affecting that
vocation.