Court Opinion

ID: 9516446
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 23:42:37.482164+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:37:15.580102
License: Public Domain

ZAPPALA, Justice,
concurring.
While I join in the majority opinion’s resolution of the constitutionality of § 359(b) of the Tax Reform Code of 1971, Act of March 4, 1971, P.L. 6, as amended, 72 P.S. § 7359(b), I am writing separately to address the issue which the majority found unnecessary to address before reaching the constitutional claim of a violation of the uniformity clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
The Commonwealth Court denied preliminary objections in the nature of demurrer filed on behalf of Secretary of Revenue James Schemer asserting that he was not a proper party to the action. Relying upon the enumeration of the Department of Revenue’s duties and responsibilities, 72 P.S. § 7354, the court concluded that Secretary Schemer was a proper party to the action because he “has a clear and undisputed interest in defending its [§ 359(b) ] constitutionality.” R. 51a. Section 7354 provides:
The department is hereby charged with the enforcement of the provisions of this article, and is hereby authorized and empowered to prescribe, adopt, promulgate and enforce rules and regulations relating to any matter or thing pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the provisions of this article and the collection of taxes imposed by this article.
Section 7354 was not intended to require the Secretary of Revenue to enforce, and impliedly defend, a local tax ordinance such as that adopted by the City of Philadelphia. I would hold that the Secretary of Revenue was not a proper party in this action.
HUTCHINSON, J., joins in this concurring opinion.