The Honorable Susan Combs Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Post Office Box 13528 Austin, Texas 78711-3528
Re: Method of calculating deduction under section
Dear Comptroller Combs:
You ask about the duties of the Comptroller of Public Accounts (the "Comptroller") under section
The total taxable value of school district property under section 403.302 is the "market value of all taxable property less" certain specified exemptions and deductions. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. §
Your specific question pertains to the deductions that relate to tax increment financing contained in section
*Page 2For the purposes of this section, "taxable value" means the market value of all taxable property less:
. . . .
The Honorable Susan Combs — Page 2 (
GA-0549 )
(4) subject to Subsection (e), the total dollar amount of any captured appraised value of property that:
(A) is within a reinvestment zone created on or before May 31,1999, or is proposed to be included within the boundaries of a reinvestment zone as the boundaries of the zone and the proposed portion of tax increment paid into the tax increment fund by a school district are described in a written notification provided by the municipality or the board of directors of the zone to the governing bodies of the other taxing units in the manner provided by Section
311.003 (e), Tax Code, before May 31, 1999, and within the boundaries of the zone as those boundaries existed on September 1, 1999, including subsequent improvements to the property regardless of when made;(B) generates taxes paid into a tax increment fund created under Chapter 311, Tax Code, under a reinvestment zone financing plan approved under Section
311.011 (d), Tax Code, on or before September 1, 1999; and(C) is eligible for tax increment financing under Chapter 311, Tax Code. . . .
TEX. GOV'TCODE ANN. § 403.302(d) (Vernon Supp. 2006). You wish to know whether this section requires you, in your calculation of the total taxable value of school district property, to subtract the dollar amount of all of the captured appraised value of property located in the reinvestment zone, or to subtract the amount of only the percentage of the captured appraised value that generates the school district tax actually paid into the tax increment fund. See Request Letter,supra note 1, at 2.
In addressing your question it is helpful to understand the operation of a municipality's tax increment reinvestment zone and a school district's involvement in the zone. Tax increment financing is a mechanism whereby municipalities can raise funds to finance public improvements in blighted or underdeveloped areas. See City of El Paso v.El Paso Cmty. Coll Dist., 729 S.W.2d 296, 296 (Tex. 1987). Under the Tax Increment Financing Act, chapter 311 of the Texas Tax Code, a municipality designates an area as a reinvestment zone and establishes the tax increment base as the total appraised property values within the zone on the date the zone is created. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. §§
As a taxing unit, a school district may participate and pay taxes into the tax increment fund under an agreement with the municipality responsible for creating the reinvestment zone. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. §§
With this background we examine Government Code section
By any measure, section 403.302(d)(4) is not a model of clarity. Nevertheless, under the ordinary reading of the text, it is apparent that the subject of subdivisions (A)-(C) must be "property," and not "value." That is clear because, in subdivision (A), "value" cannot be "within a *Page 4 reinvestment zone," but some "property" is; in subdivision (C), "value" cannot be "eligible for tax increment financing under Chapter 311, Tax Code," but some property is; and (B) would have to have the same subject as (A) and (C), lacking, as it does, a subject of its own. Consequently, under the natural reading of the statute, for every "property" that satisfies subdivisions (A), (B), and (C), the "total dollar amount of any captured appraised value" must be subtracted from the "market value of all taxable property." Under this construction, the amount deducted would not be limited to the proportion of school district tax actually paid into the tax increment fund, but rather would be the "total dollar amount of any captured appraised value" of the property.
However, a statutory provision should not be given a meaning inconsistent with other provisions of the statute, although it might possibly be susceptible to a different construction if standing alone.Barr v. Bernhard,
Thus, the most natural reading of the text of subsection (d) runs contrary to the principle that we must give effect to every word in a statute and, if possible, should not treat any statutory language as mere surplusage. We should not lightly presume that the Legislature did a useless act. See In re Mo. Pac. R.R. Co.,
The canons of statutory construction therefore require us to attempt to construe subsection (d) differently in order to render subsection (e) effective, useful, and in harmony with subsection (d). We believe that the text of subsection (d) permits such an alternative reading. Namely, although "property" remains the subject to the verbs of subdivisions (A)-(C), nothing in the statute specifies that "property" is a single, indivisible noun. Thus, it is possible to construe subdivision (d)(4)(B) to limit the amount deducted to only that portion of property in a reinvestment zone that generates tax revenue that is actually paid into a tax increment fund. In other words, when a school district elects to remit to a tax increment fund only some of the taxes generated by the property, the remaining portion of the property falls outside subsection (d) because it is generating taxes that are not paid into the tax increment fund. Under this construction, the amount deducted would be proportional to the percentage of property that generates the school district tax actually paid into the fund.
Although we might not reach this construction of subsection (d) in isolation, we believe this latter construction is necessary to give full effect to the terms of subsection (e) as well. Accordingly, *Page 5
interpreting subsection (d) in harmony with subsection (e), we construe section
Furthermore, subdivision (A) of section 403.302(d)(4), which establishes time limits by which a reinvestment zone must be established, states that a zone that is only proposed as of May 31, 1999, incorporates "the proposedportion of tax increment paid into thetax increment fund by a school district" as stated in the Tax Code section
Finally, we recognize that limiting a school district's deduction to the percentage of captured appraised value proportional to the percentage of tax increment actually paid into the tax increment fund comports with the purpose of section 403.302. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. §
We accordingly conclude, based on the language of subsections 403.302(d) and (e) as the language is informed by the principles of statutory construction* that section 403.302(d) requires a deduction of the amount of the captured appraised value of school district property located in a tax increment reinvestment zone that corresponds to the percentage of the tax increment actually paid into the tax increment fund by the school district. *Page 6
Very truly yours,
GREG ABBOTT Attorney General of Texas
KENT C. SULLIVAN First Assistant Attorney General
ELLEN L. WITT Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
NANCY S. FULLER Chair Opinion Committee
CHARLOTTE M. HARPER Assistant Attorney General Opinion Committee
