Opinion ID: 1666665
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: Several issues presented by appellant challenge the constitutionality of Act No. 594, Acts of Alabama, 1977, under § 45 of the Alabama Constitution of 1901. Those issues are dealt with here in a consolidated fashion: Whether the Act is unconstitutional under § 45 of the Alabama Constitution of 1901 because the title to the Act is deceptive in that it fails to disclose the retroactive features of the Act, whether the act itself violates § 45 in its entirety, and whether § 45 is violated because of the lack of an accurate synopsis and fiscal note on the Act. The Alabama Constitution of 1901 provides in Article IV at § 45: The style of the laws of this state shall be: Be it enacted by the legislature of Alabama, which need not be repeated, but the act shall be divided into sections for convenience, according to substance, and the sections designated merely by figures. Each law shall contain but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title, except general appropriation bills, general revenue bills, and bills adopting a code, digest, or revision of statutes; and no law shall be revived, amended, or the provisions thereof extended or conferred, by reference to its title only; but so much thereof as is revived, amended, extended, or conferred, shall be re-enacted and published at length. Alabama Constitution of 1901, Art. IV, § 45 (emphasis added). This Court has interpreted § 45 as imposing the requirement that where an act is intended to have retroactive application, the title of the act must fairly and reasonably indicat[e] that the act is retrospective. Lindsay v. United States Savings and Loan Association, 120 Ala. 156, 24 So. 171 (1897); See Gayle v. Edwards, 261 Ala. 84, 72 So.2d 848 (1954). The purpose of § 45 is to prevent fraud upon the legislature and the people of this state, and the test for whether a statute violates § 45 gives effect to those purposes. The question to be addressed in determining the constitutionality of an act under § 45 is: Whether the title of the act is so misleading and uncertain that the average legislator or person reading the same would not be informed of the purpose of the enactment. Pillans v. Hancock, 203 Ala. 570, 84 So. 757 (1919); Opinion of The Justices, 294 Ala. 571, 319 So.2d 699 (1975). To the extent that the three-year carryback provision has retrospective application to the conditional income tax obligation, we hold that the retroactive feature of the Act is fairly and reasonably indicated in the title of the Act by the word carryback. The connotation of the word carryback should be familiar to those with a passing acquaintance with the field of taxation. Loss carrybacks for financial institutions have been authorized since 1955. Act No. 568, Acts of Alabama, 1955 (now Code 1975, § 40-16-1(2)k). The early version of § 172 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, which authorizes loss carrybacks, has been part of the federal income tax law since 1918. Applying the test enunciated above to the title of Act 594, we hold that the word carryback, which has long been part of our tax system, is sufficient to indicate any retrospective application of the Act, and the title is not so misleading and uncertain that the average legislator or person reading the same would not be informed of the purpose of the enactment. Finally, appellant challenges the constitutionality of the Act based upon violation of the House and Senate Rules, lack of an accurate synopsis or fiscal note. The Rules of the House of Representatives and Senate of the State of Alabama are not a part of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 and thus do not furnish a basis upon which to challenge the constitutionality of Act 594, Acts of Alabama, 1977. AFFIRMED. MADDOX, ALMON, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur. FAULKNER, J., with whom BLOODWORTH, JONES and EMBRY, JJ., join, dissents.