Opinion ID: 1320094
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Does the Tax Code prevent disclosure of the property tax information in this case?

Text: The trial judge held the purchase agreement and environmental report are not required to be kept confidential under the Tax Code because they were submitted to Tax Commission in the course of a property tax appeal. We agree. S.C.Code Ann. § 12-54-240 (Supp.1993) governs the disclosure of information filed with Tax Commission. It provides in pertinent part: (A) Except in accordance with proper judicial order or as otherwise provided by law it is unlawful for any person to divulge or make known in any manner any particulars set forth or disclosed in any report or return required under Chapters 7, 15, 16, 17, 35, or 36 of this title. The referenced chapters involve: income tax (chapter 7); estate tax (chapters 15 & 16); gift tax (chapter 17); retail license, sales and use tax (chapters 35 & 36). Property tax is excluded from the non-disclosure provisions of § 12-54-240. Appellants argue, however, that property tax information is included in § 12-54-240 via S.C.Code Ann. § 12-54-190 (Supp.1993) which provides: Unless otherwise specified, the provisions of this chapter [Chapter 54] take precedence over all other related statutory provisions. The provisions of this chapter [Chapter 54] apply to returns filed with or assessments issued by the commission as they relate to property tax and forest renewal. (emphasis added). Section 12-54-190 was enacted after § 12-54-240 and therefore arguably would apply to render property tax information non-disclosable under § 12-54-240. A careful reading of § 12-54-240, however, indicates this could not have been the intent of the legislature in enacting § 12-54-190. Section 12-54-240, which generally prevents disclosure, includes specific provisions allowing disclosure only in certain defined circumstances. For instance, § 12-54-240(B)(9) allows Tax Commission's disclosure of sales and use tax information to county and municipal officials even though sales and use tax information is generally not disclosable. Similarly, in the context of property tax, Tax Commission is charged with assessing manufacturers' real and personal property and forwarding these assessments to the local taxing authorities. S.C.Code Ann. § 12-37-970 (Supp.1993). If the enactment of § 12-54-190 was intended to bring property tax within the non-disclosure provisions of § 12-54-240 as appellants contend, it would impliedly repeal the forwarding requirement of § 12-37-970 [3] since no exception was added to § 12-54-240 to allow the disclosure to local taxing authorities. In giving effect to legislative intent, we are constrained to avoid an absurd result. See Powell v. Red Carpet Lounge, 280 S.C. 142, 311 S.E.2d 719 (1984). Since the legislature could not reasonably have intended to prevent disclosure of Tax Commission assessments to local taxing authorities, we conclude § 12-54-190 does not alter the nondisclosure provisions of § 12-54-240. Accordingly, we hold the Tax Code does not prevent disclosure of the property tax information in this case.