Case Information
*1 The Attorney General of Texas September 19, 1983 JIM MATTOX
Attorney General
Supreme P. 0. Box 12546 5121475-2501 Austin. Telex Telecopier 9101674.1367 TX. 76711. Court Building 5121475-0266 [2546] Honorable James W. Smith, Jr. Pearsall, Texas 78061 P. 0. Box V Frio County Attorney opinion No. JM-74 by section 6.06(e) of the Tax Code Ik: Whether penalties established for late payment of taxing entity assessments may be rescinded 714 Jackson. Suite 700 Dear Mr. Smith: Dallas. TX. 75202-4506
2141742.6944
You ask us two questions regarding section 6.06(e) of the Tax
Code. This section governs the method by which taxing units pay to the appraisal district their portions of the appraisal district’s 4624 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 expenditures as allocated by section 6.06(d), Tax Code. Section El Paso. TX. 79905.2793 9151533-3464 6.06(e) of the Tax Code provides the following: -.h Unless the governing body of a unit and the chief 1 Texas, Suite 700 appraiser agree to a different method of payment, ..,us,on. TX. 77002-3111 each taxing unit shall pay its allocation in four 7131223.5666 equal payments to be made at the end of each calendar quarter, and the first payment shall be
606 Broadway, Suite 312 made before January 1 of the year in which the Lubbock, TX. 79401.3479 budget takes effect. A payment is delinquent if 6061747~5236 not paid on the date it is due. A delinquent payment incurs a penalty of 5 percent of the 4309 N. Tenth. Suite B amount of the payment and accrues interest at an McAllen, TX. 76501.1665 annual rate of 10 percent. If the budget is 5121662-4547 amended, any change in the amount of a unit’s
allocation is apportioned among the payments 200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 remaining. (Emphasis added). San Antonio, TX. 76205-2797
5121225.4191 Your first question is: If one taxing entity is allowed to pay without
An Equal OppOrtUnitYI Affirmative Action EmP~oVef penalty and interest, should any other penalty and
interest paid by another taxing entity be refunded?
Your second question is:
If payments are accepted without payment of penalty and interest, what other recourse would -- the Frio County Appraisal District have for collecting due funds?
We answer your first question in the negative, because we conclude that the appraisal district is without authority to waive or rescind the penalty and interest to any taxing unit which tenders a delinquent payment. Because we answer your first question in the negative, we deem it unnecessary to answer your second question.
Under settled nrincinles of law. the imnosition of uenalties falls within the poiice power of the iegislature. Waters-Pierce Oil Company v. Texas, 212 U.S. 86, 107 (1909); First Texas~P! cudential Insurance Company v. Smallwood, 242 S.W. 498, 505 (Tex. , Civ. App. - Beaumont 1922, no writ). Moreover, remission by general statute of penalties which have accrued and are due political subdivisions is constitutional. Jones v. Williams, 45 S.W.2d 130, 137 (Tex. 1931). But, in this instance remission cannot be accomplished, because there is no statutory provision permitting it. At no place in the code is the appraisal district given the authority to rescind or waive the penalty and interest imposed by section 6,06(e) of the Tax Code.
Generally, the powers of such governmental agencies as counties, townships, and school districts are more strictly construed than those of incorporated municipalities. Tri-City Fresh Water Supply District No. 2 of Harris County v. Mann, 142 S.W.2d 945, 948 (Tex. 1940). For examule. a county has no nowers or duties exceut those which are clearlv set forth and defined bv the constitution and the state statutes. Harrison Count y v. City of Marshall, 253 S.W.2d 67, 69 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth 1952, writ ref'd); Wichita County v. Vance, 217 S.W.2d 702, 703 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth 1949, writ ref' n.r.e.). See also Miller v. El Paso County, 150 S.W.Zd 1000 (Tex. 1941). Analogously, we hold that an appraisal district can exercise only those powers and duties which are clearly set forth in the constitution and statutes of this state. Therefore, absent specific statutory authority, we conclude that an appraisal district is without authority to rescind or waive the penalty imposed by section 6.06(e) of the Tax Code.
SUMMARY An appraisal district is without authority to rescind or waive the penalty and interest imposed by section 6.06(e) of the Tax Code upon taxing units which are delinquent in paying their allocation of the appraisal district's expenditures.
JIM MATTOX Attorney General of Texas *3 .
TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney General
DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Jim Moellinger
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Rick Gilpin, Chairman
Jon Bible
David Brooks
Colin Carl
Jim Moellinger
Nancy Sutton