148 S.W.2d 308 | Ark. | 1941
Appellee McCuing brought suit as a citizen and resident of Stuttgart and of School District *891 No. 22 of Arkansas county. He owns real and personal property within the city and school district on which taxes are paid for city and school purposes.1 It is contended legislative enactments authorize use to be made of moneys arising from such taxes in contravention of constitutional sanction, and therefore the acts are void to the extent that they permit the diversions complained of.2
In overruling a demurrer to the complaint, the trial court issued the order shown in the margin.3 Plaintiffs and the defendant appealed.
Act 331, approved March 16, 1939, vests discretion in the state land commissioner to sell or donate tax-forfeited lots, tracts, or parcels of land lying beyond the corporate limits of cities or towns. However, until actual *892 sale or donation, the right of redemption continues. Before the effective date of act 331 all lots, tracts, and parcels of land outside of cities and towns which had forfeited for the non-payment of taxes were subject to sale, redemption, or donation, and all city and town lots were subject to sale or redemption.
Section 3 of act 129, approved March 13, 1929, empowers the commissioner of state lands, highways, and improvements,4 subsequent to January 1, 1930, to make private sale at $1 per acre of tax-forfeited acreage lands.5 By 4 all town and city lots and all lots, blocks, divisions and subdivisions that have been plotted and sold as such outside of the corporate limits6 shall be subject to private sale by the commissioner for the taxes, penalties, and cost charged against them "as appears in the certificate of the county clerk to such commissioner."
Section 8 of act 129 (which does not appear in Pope's Digest) appropriates to the permanent school *893 fund half of the money realized from redemptions and directs that half be returned to the county in which the land lies. Section 11 of act 331 of 1939 directs that all sums received from the sale of tax-forfeited lands be credited to the state land fund and expended for the purposes enumerated, and if any amount remains after those purposes have been served, it shall be deposited to the credit of the permanent school fund.
By act 96, approved March 27, 1893,7 the amount required to redeem any tax-forfeited lot, tract, or parcel of land, is a sum equal to the tax, penalty and cost for which it sold, together with penalties and costs and all expenses paid by the state in acquiring title, and all state and county taxes that would have subsequently accrued had the property remained on the tax books subject to taxation.
Certain acts of 1939, mentioned in the eighth footnote,8 appropriate moneys received from the sale of tax-forfeited lands. Gravamen of appellants' complaint is that neither the counties, the cities, towns, nor school districts receive from the state any of the money paid the state where tax-forfeited lands are sold, while half of the amount received from redemptions is returned to the counties.
The question directly presented is: Do counties, cities, towns, and school districts have such an interest in unpaid tax assessments against real property that the state, in becoming purchaser at the collector's sale, ultimately takes title charged with the liens of the political subdivisions; or, expressed differently, are the liens vested rights inhering in the counties, cities, towns, and school districts? *894
Section 148 of the general revenue law of March 31, 1883,9 directs that immediately after the expiration of two years allowed for redemption of land sold for taxes, the county clerk shall certify the state's purchases, "stating the amount of the taxes, penalty, and costs thereon, and cause the same to be recorded in the recorder's office in the county, and thereupon the title to all lands embraced in such certificate shall vest in the state."
It seems, therefore, that the state's purchase is consummated in so far as acquirement of title is concerned when the clerk causes the certified list to be registered.
The general rule is that at a tax sale the state's lien and the purchase merge.10 But, it is urged, there are other liens than that of the state, and since the assessments are in pursuance of constitutional authority, it is insisted that an act of the general assembly cannot have a divesting effect. This would undoubtedly be true if the lien were fixed by the constitution, as distinguished from legislative action.
Nowhere is power given the taxing units here involved to cause the object of taxation to be sold. The state must move; and it has promulgated forms of procedure which by express terms of applicable laws vest title.
It is our view that the state, in purchasing the property, takes it free of the liens which formerly attached. In other words, the state has not received moneys arising from a tax levied for one purpose and applied it to a different purpose. The reason is that the taxes were not paid, and therefore the money was not realized within the meaning of art. 16, 11, of our constitution.
We find nothing in the constitution requiring the state to treat these tax liens as vested interests. On the contrary, while in a given case the amount required to redeem embraces the constituents of taxes, penalties, and costs, these items and ownership of the land have *895 merged, and the exaction is the result. In respect of lands sold or donated, as distinguished from redemptions, the price does not necessarily have relation to taxes originally assessed and charges subsequently accruing while the property is subject to redemption.
The decree is reversed with directions to dismiss the complaint.