TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION A. B. CONNER, Director College Station, Texas BULLETIN NO. 645 JANUARY 1944 A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS W. ROBERT PARKS, L. P. GABBARD, and H. C. BRADSHAW Division 0f Farm and Ranch Economics, Bureau 0f Agricultural Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperating. 249mg £El|6lillllf8|&§;T@g§3gma§ggflggegfiexas GoHegeSIafiQn, Texas AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS F. C. BOLTON, Acting President D-13-544-6500 [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] Despite the attention devoted to the general property tax over a long period of years, it is still exceedingly difficult to determine exactly what the law is. The newly elected official or the inter- ested citizen finds that “the law” is embodied in the Constitution, the statutes, the opinions of the Attorney General and the de- cisions of the State and Federal Courts. It is, therefore, not sur- prising to find that officials and citizens alike hold widely differ- ing views as to what the law requires as well as what the law permits. This bulletin is designed to meet a long standing need for a brief, easily understood outline of the laws governing the real property tax in Texas. If you desire to obtain more detailed in- formation, you may do so by consulting the references listed in the text. - Following the outline of the law, a final section is devoted to a discussion of the defects of the existing system as well as the means through which these defects may be overcome. CONTENTS Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' Property Subject to Tax. . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..; Special Types of Property Included . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Severed Mineral Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..‘. Insurance Companies, Banks, and Public Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Property Exempt from Taxation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Constitutional and Statutory Exemptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '_. “Administrative Exemptions” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f Taxing Units and Tax Officials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Districts Permitted Assessor-Collectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. County as Agent for Other Tax Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . State an-d County Tax Officials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. County Assessor-Collectors and Deputies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . County Commissioners Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. State Comptroller of Public Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. '_ Rendition: Taxpayer’s Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Rendition: Assessor's Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assessor’s Legal Obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Equalization, Supervision, and Review of Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. a Function of Commissioners Court.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correction of Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review of Valuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Land ‘Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Preparation of Tax Rolls.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Review of Assessments by Courts of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Establishment of Tax Rates: Tax Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...,; School Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . _ _Restrictions on Tax Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Payment of Current- Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Payment Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Collection Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Discounts for Prompt Payment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Tax Receipts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ' Protection of Funds Collected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Q l Bonding of Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Reports and Deposits of Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..y Protection of Taxpayer's Right: Taxpayer's Suits and Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l, Enjoining Collection of Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L Payment and Recovery of Back Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ~'__ Collection of Delinquent Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Penalties for Tax Delinquency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘ Establishment and Transfer of Tax Liens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. »~ » Suits to Foreclose Tax Liens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Notification of Delinquency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Employment of Delinquent Tax Contractors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Institution of Suit by Taxing Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Citation of Defendant Parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , Defense Against Tax Suits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ' Judgment, Order of Sale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 Tax Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 _ Redemption of Property Sold‘ for Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. * Resale of Property Bid Off to Taxing Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. _ Validation of Tax Titles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Grounds for Defeating Purchaser's Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Limitations on Title Conveyed by Tax Deed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Statute of Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Four-year Statute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Limitation Through “Peaceable and Adverse” Possession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Compensation to Defeated Tax Title Holder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Discussion of Real Property Laws With Suggestions for Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. - Assessment and Equalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Committees of Citizens Can Assist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. More Equitable Assessments Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. The County as a Unit for Assessment Purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State Agency Should Assess Utilitie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State Should Equalize Assessments Among Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Collection of Real Property Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Collection Procedures Affect Equality of Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Disposal of Tax Delinquent Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Tax Foreclosure Suits andClearance of Tax Titles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recodification of Tax Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS By W. Robert Parks,‘ L. P. Gabbard,’ and H. C. Bradshaw“ The general property tax is the chief source of financial support for local units of government in Texas, and in addition supplied about 12 per cent of all State tax revenues in 1942. According to the State Auditor and , Efficiency Expert, the total ad valorem or general property tax collections of all units of government in Texas amounted to $155,321,637 in 1942. This sum is equal to $24 for each man, woman, and child in the state, based on a 1940 population of 6,414,482. One of the most important classes of property upon which the tax is levied is farm and ranch lands. The average tax per acre on farm and ranch lands has risen from 8.6 cents in 1913 to 17.9 in 1942, an increase of 108 per cent. g Despite the attention devoted to the general property tax over a long period of years, it is still exceedingly difficult to determine exactly what the law is. The newly elected official or the interested citizen finds that “the law” is embodied in the Constitution, the statutes, the opinions of the Attorney General and the decisions of the State and Federal Courts. It is, therefore, not surprising to find that officials and citizens alike hold widely differing views as to what the law requires as well as what the law permits. With few exceptions the section which follows immediately is devoted to an outline of the laws governing the administration of real property taxes in Texas. Comments are made only when they are necessary as a means of explaining the law itself. In the final section of this bulletin, the authors present their ideas as to the good and bad features of the law, as well as the administration of the law, and call attention to changes which should be made in order to improve the administration of real prop-l erty taxes in Texas. / The law reported in this bulletin is that in effect at the end of the calendar year 1941, including the statutes enacted by the 1941 legislature. Citations, unless otherwise indicated, are to Vernon’s Texas Statutes. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAX For the purpose of taxation, real property is construed to include the land itself, “and all buildings, structures and improvement or other fixtures of whatsoever kind thereon, and all rights and privileges belonging or in any wise appertaining thereto, and all mines, minerals, quarries and fossils in and under the same?" All real property in Texas is subject to the ad valorem general property tax unless specifically exempted. ‘Legislative Planning Analyst, Division of Land Economics, U.S.D.A. “Chief, Division of Farm and Ranch Economics, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. 3Economist in Farm Taxation, Division of Farm and Ranch Economics, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. ‘Art. 7146. 6 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Special Types of Property Included Certain types of property, which in some states are set apart from‘ general property and accorded special tax treatment, are specifically in-j cluded under the general property tax in Texas. Severed Mineral Rights Mineral and mineral rights are treated as other real property. Ordi- narily real property is taxed as a unit. However, in the case of mineral-v bearing lands “where there have been severances by conveyance, exception or reservation, so that one portion of the realty belongs to one person and. other portions to others, each owner should pay taxes under proper assess- ment against him of the portion owned by him. The fact that a portion‘ may consist of minerals or of fractional interest therein makes no differq ence.”‘ Royalty interests in oil and gas are taxable to the owner of the interest as a separate item of real property. Likewise, an oil and gas lease, regardless of the particular form of the granting or habendum clause, is taxable to the lessee as real property.“ Practice is at variance with the law, however, in the taxation of sev- A ered mineral rights. Assessor-collectors usually make no attempt to assess unproductive leases and royalties. In many cases, however, the owner will render this property for taxation at a very low figure, in order to keep his property on the tax rolls and preserve a clear title in case his interest should become productive in the future. Insurance Companies, Banks, and Public Utilities The real estate of domestic insurance companies is taxable like all; other real property.’ Real and personal property of a bank is taxable in the county“ in which the bank is located and must be rendered to the as- sessor of that county.‘ The real and personal property of railroad, tele- graph, and turnpike companies must be listed in the county where they ,6 the county.” Franchises and easements to * use streets for the purpose of running street cars, railroad trains, or the g1 erection of transmission lines are real property and, as such, subject to , are located and are taxable by taxation.” Property Exempt from Taxation , The Texas Constitution provides for equal and uniform taxation of all m’ property within the State.“ Constitutional requirements in several States have been interpreted so as to hinder, or positively to preclude, classifica-' tion or exemption of any property. However, Article 8, Sec. 2, of the Texas ‘ Constitution specifically provides for exemption of certain properties. Constitutional and Statutory Exemptions The Constitution (Article 8) provides that “three thousand dollars of the assessed value of all residence homesteads as now defined by law shall be exempt from all taxation for all State purposes.” No more than 200 5Hager v. Stakes, 116 Tex. 453. “Summers, W. L., The Law of Oil and Gas, 1938, Vol. 4, pp. 215, 216, 218. 'Art. 4754. sArts. 7165, 7166. “Art. 7159. . "Texas and P. R. Co. v. City of El Paso, 126 Tex. 86, 85 S. W. (2d) 245 (1935). “Constitution, Art. 8. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 7 acres, however, can be included in a homestead." The exemption extends only to State taxes. The legislature, in addition, has prescribed the follow- ing, among others: All property belonging exclusively to the United States, the State, or any political subdivision of the State, and used exclusively for “public purposes,” with the exception of certain specific types of prop- erty designated by statute and court decisions; lands and buildings devoted entirely to education, charity and religion; lands and buildings used ex- clusively to teach and to demonstrate, without charge, modern and scien- tific methods of farming; non-profit cemeteries; non-profit art galleries and other property of Societies of Fine Arts; property of Boy Scouts; property of Texas Federation of W0men’s Clubs; and State office build- ings of the Texas Congress of Parents and Teachers.” “Administrative Exemptions” I The courts have strictly construed the exemption statutes, but they are not the only public officers engaged in the interpretation of these statutes. Day-to-day practice on the part of the assessor-collector is no less an interpretation of the law than a formal decision handed down by the courts. County assessor-collectors are generally liberal in their inter- pretation of the homestead exemption statute. Seldom have municipally owned power and gas lines serving adjoining rural areas been assessed by county assessors. Yet it is the opinion of the Texas Attorney General that these municipal enterprises serving other jurisdictions for a profit are not “public property used for public purposes” and are therefore taxable.“ Al- though REA lines are not exempt from taxation under Texas laws, as- sessor-collectors in several counties do not attempt to tax these lines, and in others tax them only nominally—perhaps because they feel that the REA is a socially beneficial enterprise that should not be burdened by taxes in its infancy. The liberal granting of “administrative exemptions” may make even more serious inroads into the property tax base than have the generously bestowed statutory exemptions. It is unjust, however, to criticize the lib- erality of the assessor-collector too severely, for the exemption statutes fail to give him sufficiently definitive methods for determining property en- titled to exemption. TAXING UNITS AND TAX OFFICIALS Real property is levied upon in Texas to help support all levels of government within the State and to finance a wide variety of public un- dertakings. State, counties, cities, and towns all depend, in varying de- grees, upon the real property tax to finance their governmental functions. In addition, such special undertakings as education, drainage, water con- trol, water improvement, and so on, are financed by the property tax or special assessments on real property. Districts Permitted Assessor-Collectors Counties, cities, and towns have the power to assess property situated within their boundaries.“ Independent school districts are authorized to "Art. 3833. “Art. 7150, 715011. “Attorney General Opinion, N0. 0-2205, June 1940. “Arts. 7245 and 7246 give such authority to counties; Art. 977 to cities: and Arts. 1147 and 1161 to towns. " 8 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION maintain their own assessor and collector.“ Rural high schools, except counties with a population between 8,500 and 8,700, may assess their own; taxes; but the county collector collects all such taxes." Taxes for the county unit school system, under which all schools are combined in asingl system, are assessed and collected by an assessor-collector appointed by the county board of education, except in such counties having a population? between 3,960 and 4,000.“ Drainage districts may also have their own sessor-collector, if two-thirds of the persons within the district expressing, such desire in an election.” Water control and improvement districtsf‘... water improvement districts," water power control districts,” fresh water: f supply districts," all may have their own tax officials. County as Agent for Other Tax Districts The county levies and collects a county tax upon all real property . situated within its borders, and serves also as agent for levying and col-it lecting the State property tax. In addition, the county assessor-collector acts for certain districts which are specially prohibited from assessing and , collecting taxes. These include common school districts,“ levee improve-i‘ ment districts levying real property tax,” certain navigation districts,“ l‘ and water control and preservation districts." Moreover, incorporated if cities, towns or villages, drainage districts, water improvement districts, water control and improvement districts, or navigation districts, by ordi- nance or proper resolution of their governing boards, may avail them- selves of the services of county tax assessors and collectors when the county commissioners court has made the assessor-collectors’ services available to the districts. For administering the taxes for one of the above districts the assessor-collector receives the compensation agreed upon by the governing body of the district and the commissioners court, which cannot execeed 1 per cent of taxes collected for the district." State and County Tax Officials The responsibility for administering the county tax system is divided i between taxpayer, assessor-collector, commissioners court, and the State _ comptroller. County Assessor-Collectors and Deputies V The assessor-collector, given the dual task of assessing and collecting taxes, is elected for a two-year term at the regular biennial elections.” In ‘ counties with a population of less than 10,000 the sheriff is given the ad- 4t . 2783b, 2783c. "Art. 2922 . 1 “Art. 2724. “Art. 8145. goArt. 7882-3. “Art. 7642. . "Art. 7807d. ~ 23Organized under Art. 8263e-1. “Arts. 2784, 2795. , “Arts. 7998, 8015. I “Those organized under Arts. 8198 and 8263h-1. "Arts. 7871, 7873. "Supp, Art. 1042b, as amended by ch. 235, General and Special Laws of Texas, 1941. Older statutes also authorize certain taxing units to transfer their assessment and collection functions to the county. Art. 7359 relates to cities, towns and villages; Art. 2792 applies to independent school districts; and 7880 relates to water control and improvement dis- tricts. ’°Constitution, Art. 8, Sec. 16; Vernon's Texas Statutes (1936), Art. 7245. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL 0F TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 9 ditional duties of assessing and collecting taxes,” although there is no similarity between keeping the peace and assessing and collecting taxes. To aid him in his duties, the assessor-collector may appoint deputies, with the approval of the commissioners court. For example, he may, in counties with a population of 355,000 or more, appoint technicians with special training in evaluating oil and mineral-bearing lands, industrial and manufacturing establishments, and so on.“ In other counties commission- ers courts sometimes contract with valuation firms to assess oil, utility and similar property. The assessor-collector may appoint deputies to aid him in collecting taxes in the larger cities and towns.” To collect delinquent taxes, tax contracts may be let to private attorneys by the commissioners court with the approval of the State comptroller.” Prior to 1935, all county assessors and collectors were paid on a fee basis. In that year an amendment to the Constitution (Art. 16, Sec. 61) pro- vided that county officers in all counties having a population of 20,000 or more be compensated on a salary basis. In counties with a population of less than 20,000 the commissioners courts were empowered to determine whether county officers would be paid on a fee or salary basis. (The law growing out of this constitutional amendment is embodied in Art. 3912c). County Commissioners Court The work of the assessor-collector is reviewed by the commissioners court of the county. Sitting as the board of equalization, the court ex- amines, corrects, and approves the assessor’s lists, and raises and lowers individual assessments. The commissioners court also examines the collec- tion records. Only after his books have been approved by the commissioners court can the assessor-collector receive his compensation. State Comptroller of Public Accounts“ Although Texas levies a State property tax, it has no State tax com- mission. In the absence of a separate tax agency, the comptroller acts for the State. The comptroller’s function in connection with real property tax- ation is chiefly the standardization. of procedure among the various taxing; units. To carry out this duty he is given power to prescribe and supply certain forms to be used in the assessment and collection process. From time to time, the comptroller issues a manual, entitled Instructions for Assessors, which furnishes assessors with statutory requirements and the comptroller’s rules and regulations for assessing and collecting property tax. (Upon request, the comptroller will interpret tax statutes for the assessor-collectors.) The 14 State ad valorem tax auditors annually check county accounts and give advice to those officials seeking assistance. The comptroller’s office has no authority to assess special types of real prop- erty which are especially difficult to value, such as oil or mineral-bearing lands, public utilities, and so on. Nor does the comptroller’s office have the power to equalize assessments among the counties, many of which con- sistently undervalue the property within their borders in order to lessen their tax contribution to the State. “Constitution, Art. 8, Sec. 16; Vernon's Texas Statutes (1936), Art. 7246a. "Supp" Art. 7252. “Art. 7256. “Arts. 7335, 7335a. “See pp. 27-28 for fuller discussion of comptroller’s supervisory activities. 10 EULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION These, in brief, are the officials who administer the county and State property tax system. Their functions and powers will be outlined in more detail in the following discussion of the tax machinery in motion. ASSESSMENT “The word ‘assessment’ as here used (in the Constitution) . . . . evi- dently means the sum which has been ascertained as the apportioned part of the tax to be charged against the particular piece of property, but un- der our Constitution and the provisions of our statute, the word embraces more than simply the amount and includes the procedure on the part of the officials by which property is listed, valued, and finally the pro rata declared.” This comprehensive view of the term “assessment,” expressed by the Texas Supreme Court in State v. Farmer,” will be taken in the following discussion. Rendition: Taxpayefs Function Between January 1 and April 30 of each year every taxpayer is re- quired to render under oath all property held or owned by him on January l.“ This is done at the request of the assessor-collector. The three essen- tial things required in the listing of property are: (1) name of owner, (2) description of property, and (3) value of property. More fully, the state- ment must contain the abstract number, survey number, certificate num- ber, name of the original grantee, number of acres, and value of property. City and town property must be listed by lot and block." In the absence of fraud or mistake, a rendition of property is binding on the owner. For example, an owner may not complain of an insufficient description of his property on the tax rolls if it corresponds with the de- scription furnished by himself. Nor may he complain that individual tracts of land were not separately assessed, if he has rendered them as a single tract.“ Even if the property is listed after April 30, if the assessor has failed to administer the oath, or if the person rendering property has failed to subscribe to the list, the assessment shall be binding “as if made in strict pursuance of law.”3° Rendition: Assessor’s Functions Voluntary rendition is not as automatic a process as the statutes say. The functions and powers of the assessor are designed to force the tax- payer to render his property and to place limitations on his discretion in valuing it. Assessor’s Legal Obligations Each year, between January 1 and April 30, the assessor is to call upon every property owner in his county and to require the owner to make a valuation of his property, under an oath administered by the assessor.“ Moreover, the assessor, in his oath of office, swears to “personally view and inspect all the real estate and improvements thereon subject to taxa- tion, lying in said county, that may be rendered to me for taxation . . . “State v. Farmer, 94 Tex. 232, 59 S. W. 541 (1900). “Arts. 7.151, 7161. "Arts. 7162, 7164. - “French Independent School District v. Howth, 134 Tex. 211, 134 S. W. (2d 1036 (1940). “Art. 7190. “Art. 7.189. Power to administer oath given in Art. 7184. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 11 land to the best of my ability make an estimate of the cash value, the market value of such property.” In other words, the assessor is oath- bound to inspect property personally and make an independent judgment as to its value.“ If the assessor is satisfied with the valuation set by the property owner, he enters it upon his lists. However, if in his judgment the valua- tion is below a ‘reasonable cash market value or the intrinsic value of prop- i, erty which has no market value, he must submit to the Board of Equaliza- tion not only the valuation rendered by the owner himself but also his own estimation of the value of the property.“ If the assessor sees the individual and is unable to obtain a statement 1 as to the value of property, he has the power and duty of assessing it at its “full and true value,” which assessment “shall be as valid and binding as if such property had been rendered by the . . . . owner thereof.”‘“ ' Each assessor is required to make an abstract of all the blocks or _ subdivisions of each of the cities, towns or villages of his county, in a book furnished him by the commissioners court for that purpose. Diagrams of each block or subdivision, giving number of each lot, must be included in the abstract.“ If any part of the land shown in the assessor’s abstract is left unrendered, he has the power to assess it to the owner, if known, or if unknown, then to “unknown owners.” He must also place a value on the property.“ In addition to the duty of listing all property unrendered in the current year, the assessor also has the power to assess all real prop- erty which has not been assessed or rendered for taxation for any year since 1919." Equalization, Supervision, and Review of Assessments Function of Commissioners Court The commissioners court sits as a Board of Equalization on the second Monday in May, or as soon thereafter as possible before June 1.“ As the Board of Equalization, it receives all of the books of the assessor for inspec- tion, correction, equalization, and approval. . Correction of Errors. The Board has the supervisory power of correct- ing errors of assessment.“ For example, erroneous descriptions of prop- erty, through fault of either owner or assessor, or valuations placed on the roll by the assessor without authority, are to be corrected by the Board. The judiciary has ruled, however, that adding to or eliminating property appearing on the rolls is not the correction of an error within the meaning of the statute.“ The correct procedure is for the Board to di- rect the assessor to make necessary eliminations or additions. “Art. 7214. “Although Articles 7189, 7214, and 7191 place upon the assessor the positive obligation of calling upon the property owner and inspecting his property, it would seem from Art. 7185 that the legal requirements have been fulfilled so far as the owner is concerned when he renders his property for taxation under oath before “any officer qualified to administer same and forwards list to assessor of the county where property is taxable.” “Art. 7211. “Art. 7193. “Art. 7197. “Art. 7198. "Arts. 7207, 7336f. “Art. 7206. “Art. 7206. “Galveston County v. Galveston Gas Co., 72 Tex. 509, 10 S. W. 583 (1889). 12 BULLETIN NO. 645. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION The Board has authority to compel the assessor to carry out his honestly and correctly. To insure that “all surveys and parts of surveys lands in his county, and all the lots and blocks of the cities or towns his county are rendered for taxation,” the assessor must secure from Board a certificate stating this to be true, before the commissioners court‘? issues a draft on the county treasury and the Comptroller on the Treasury in payment for assessing State and county taxes.“ If the Boardiii finds the assessor’s books “erroneous and imperfect,” it is- to order themiai-l corrected either by the assessor or a second person. If another person cor-fr rects the assessor’s lists, the Board is to deduct as much as it deems proper A from the assessor’s compensation to pay the second person.“ If the assessor knowingly fails to fix the value of property rendered for taxes at the value set by the Board, his failure constitutes malfeasance and is cause for a his removal from office. The removal suit is to be filed by the Attorney . General and is to be conducted in the district court of the county of the , officer’s residence." i Review of Valuation. The Board of Equalization has the more sub- jective function of determining whether property has been correctly evalu- ated and of raising or lowering the valuations on the assessor’s rolls. Members of the commissioners court, when acting as a Board of Equaliza- tion, swear “not to allow any taxable property to stand assessed on the tax rolls . . . . at any sum which I believe to be less than its true market value or if it has no market value, then its real value” . . . .5‘ In carrying out this function, the Board must call before it persons who best know the value of the property in question.“ In determining the valuation, the Board is to consider what the property could have sold for at any time within 6 months previous to January 1 of the year for which the property was rendered.“ Whenever the Board finds it necessary to raise the assess- I ment of an individual’s property, it must order the county clerk to notify the renderer in writing that it desires to raise the value of his property. L, Moreover, 10 days before the convening of the Board, the county clerk is to publish in a county newspaper the date of the meeting, or is to have '_ notices to this effect printed and posted.“ In 1939, the commissioners court acting in the capacity of a Board of i’ Equalization was given the power to lower the assessed valuation of prop- erty, regardless of a previous fixing of values, and without a separate ‘i’? valuation by the assessor. The Board has the duty of lowering valuations: i: (1) if property, rendered or unrendered, current or delinquent, appears to have been assessed at a valuation greater than that placed upon other property in such locality of similar value, or out of proportion to the tax- able value of such property; (2) if, because of the depreciation in the value of certain property, an adjustment of assessed value would be ’ “equitable and expedient;” (3) if, because of long delinquency, the accumu- I . MAJ. a... lated delinquent taxes with penalties, interest and cost make their col- " p lection inequitable and confiscatory. To have the original assessment re- “Art. 7201. “Art. 7225. “Art. 7216. “Art. 7215. "Art. 7212. "Art. 7211. “Art. 7206. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 13 opened and reconsidered by the Board, the owner or his agent need only . ake application to the Board. The Board is to hear testimony from “competent and disinterested witnesses and may make such personal and independent investigations as seem necessary and expedient?“ p The above statute providing that “any previous fixing of values of ‘such property of the year involved shall not-be res adjudicata as to the particular case” is of doubtful constitutionality. Although the courts have not decided upon its constitutionality, the Attorney General has ruled that {the statute is unconstitutional, because it gives the commissioners court power to scale down any value fixed in years gone by. (Opinion No. 930, 1939). The effect of this statute would be to deprive the valuations an- nually made by the Board of Equalization of any finality whatever. Under this statute an assessment would never be final. It, therefore, contravenes ‘the Constitution, which clearly contemplates that each year’s assessment should have sufficient finality and definiteness to support action to collect taxes based upon it. Although the Attorney General adjudged this par- ticular statute invalid because of its broad scope, he was of the opinion that the Constitution would not “prevent the legislature’s investing such Boards of Equalization with power to review their own findings, if such power of review is kept within due bounds.” i Land Classification. To facilitate an equitable distribution of the tax burden, the Board of Equalization has the duty of classifying improved and {unimproved land into three classes. The first class of improved land is to include “the better quality of lands and improvements, the second to em- kbrace the second quality of lands and improvements, and the third class to ‘embrace lands of but small value or inferior improvements.” Similar {classifications are to be used for unimproved land.” “The classification stat- ~ute has been said to be mandatory; but in well considered decisions it has ébeen held that the omi-ssion of the Board to classify lands as prescribed is not of itself ground for holding that a raising of the owner’s rendered {value was illegal.”“° ,. In short, the Board of Equalization is the review and control body on the county level. Not only does it have the duty of ascertaining whether the assessor-collector has kept his books honestly and correctly, but it has the difficult task of eliminating assessment inequalities as between classes of property and between properties within the same class. Due to the fact that the rendition submitted by the taxpayer is usually not overtly ques- tioned by the assessor, the equity and justness of the whole tax system depends upon the actions of the Board of Equalization. Preparation of Tax Rolls. When his lists have been inspected, cor- *rected, and approved by the Board of Equalization, the assessor has the task of preparing rolls of both rendered and unrendered property, in ac- cordance with forms furnished by the Comptroller.“ Having completed the rolls, and having signed an oath as to his attempt to get a correct and full list of real and personal property, the assessor is required to return them once again to the Board, on or before August l.” After the Board of “Supp” Art. 7345d. 5°Ibid., Art. 7206. “Texas Jurisprudence, Vol. 40, pp. 134-135. “Art. 7218. “Art. 7222. 1 14 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Equalization has examined the rolls, prepared in triplicate, the copies are distributed t0 the collector of taxes, the Comptroller, and the county clerk, L who files his copy for public inspection.“ If, after the regular rolls have been prepared, it comes to the col- lector’s attention that certain taxable property does not appear on the rolls, he must assess such property and enter it upon a supplemental tax roll, made by him. The supplemental roll is to be scrutinized by the Board of Equalization, and triplicate copies are to be prepared and distributed in the same manner as in the regular roll.“ Review of Assessments by Courts of Law The Board of Equalization is a quasi-judicial body. Therefore, the value it fixes on taxable property is res adjudicata and is not reviewable by the courts on the mere claim that it is excessive.“ Although the general principle is well established that findings of fact by the Board of Equalization are final, the court will review cases in which an error of law was allegedly committed. An error of law may exist when: (1) the Board acted without jurisdiction; (2) an illegal pro- cedure, such as the adoption of a wrong method or principle of establish- ing value was followed; (3) the property in question was fraudulently overassessed in comparison with other property in the taxing district.“ The taxpayer seeking intervention by the court generally charges that the valuation was “arbitrary, discriminative and fraudulent.” Through con- stant usage these terms have become so nearly synonymous that it would be impracticable, if not impossible, to attempt completely to distinguish them. “Fraudulent,” of course, implies a dishonest motive. Therefore, the intention of the Board is an important factor. If, through a conscious failure on the part of the Board to exercise its discretion impartially, an excessive valuation is made, the assessment may be annulled. Strictly speaking, any method of assessment which results in discrimination is contrary to the “equality and uniformity” clause of the Constitution. To prove discrimination, however, it is necessary to show that other property was systematically undervalued, causing the plaintiff to bear a dispropor- tionate share of the taxload. Arbitrariness, regardless of fraudulent in- tent, is ground for review and annulment of an assessment. Examples of arbitrary action on the part of the Board include the rejection of pertinent evidence and failure to give taxpayer an opportunity to be heard and to submit evidence against an assessment increase.“ A survey of pertinent decisions justifies the conclusion that the court may review the Board of Equalization’s work upon a number of grounds. Precedent can be easily mustered for reviewing the case or refusing to do so.- “Arts. 7219, 7220, 7224. “Art. 7209. “Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. City of El Paso, 85 S. W. (2d) 245, (1935). “Hinkson v. Lorenzo Independent School District (Civ. App.) 109 S. W. (2d) 1008. See also Galveston County v. Galveston Gas Co., 72 Tex. 509, 10 S. W. 583, (1889); Rowland v. City of Tyler, (Com. App.) 5 S. W. (2d) 756, (1928); City of West University Place v. Home Mortgage Co., (Civ. App.) '72 S. W. (2d) 361, (1934); Bracken v. Van Zandt County, (Civ. App.) 74 S. W. (2d) 540, (1934). “Texas Jurisprudence, Vol. 40, pp. 159-164. See also Brundrett v. Lucas, (Civ. App.) 194 S. W. i613, (1917); Weatherly Independent School District v. Hughes, (Civ. App.) 41 S. W. (2d) 445. (1931); Ward County v. Wentz, (Civ. App.) 69 S. W. (2d) 571, (1934); Richardson v. State, (Civ. App.) 53 S. W. (2d) 508, (1932). A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 15 Establishment of Tax Rates: Tax Limitations State State tax rates are determined annually by the Automatic Tax Board composed of the Governor, Comptroller and State Treasurer.“ The State tax on property, exclusive of taxes for payment of the public debt and for maintenance of public schools,” may not exceed 35 cents on $100.00 valua- tion,” 35 cents for school purposes," and 7 cents for aid to confederate veterans.” Thus, the total State rate is limited to 77 cents. County County tax rates are determined by the commissioners court” in ac- cordance with the limitations established by the Constitution. County tax rates, exclusive of those for debt purposes may not exceed 80 cents per $100.00 of assessed valuation, except as noted below. Of the 80-cent rate, 25 cents may be used for general fund purposes; 25 cents for the erection of permanent improvements; 15 cents for the jury fund; and 15 cents for road and bridge funds. In addition, a tax of 15 cents on the $100.00 valua- tion is authorized by the legislature for road maintenance—on approval of the electors of the county." School Districts In each independent school district, the tax rate is determined by the board of school trustees. The tax rate for independent school districts is limited to $1 per $100 assessed valuation,“ except for a few districts which, under special acts, may use a rate amounting to as much as $1.50. In each common school district, the tax rate is determined by an elec- tion, or by the trustees and the county superintendent, in case no election is held. Following the determination by either of these methods, the county superintendent certifies the rate for all such districts to the com- _ missioners court of the county. The latter agency sets the tax levy by en- tering an order on its minutes setting forth the tax rate in each district." Restrictions on Tax Limitations In interpreting these provisions, the courts have held that these re- strictions are not applicable to special assessments on abutting property to pay for street improvements." There are several other restrictions on the application of these limitations. Taxes exceeding the limits imposed by Art. 8, Sec. 9, of the Constitution may be levied by any political subdivision of the State for the purposes enumerated in Art. 3, Sec. 52, namely: irriga- tion, navigation, flood control, and surfacing of roads. Again, Art. 11, Sec. 7, permits levies in excess of the prescribed limits for sanitary purposes and sea walls on the Gulf of Mexico by counties and cities bordering on the Gulf. “Art. 7041. “Constitution, Art. 7, Sec. 3. T°Ibid-, Art’. s, Sec. 9. “IbicL, Art. 7, Sec. 3. "Ibid" Art. 3, Sec. 51. "Art. 7045. “Constitution, Art. 8, Sec. 9. “Vernon's Texas Statutes (1936), Art. 2784. “Art. 2795. "City of Ft. Worth v. Bobbitt, 121 Tex. 14. 16 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION PAYMENT OF CURRENT TAXES Payment Procedure Collection Dates The county assessor-collector of taxes has the power and duty of col- lecting all taxes assessed upon the county and State tax lists and certain special tax districts, as previously stated.“ Possession of the tax rolls gives him “full and sufficient authority” to receive and collect taxes levied.” The collector begins the collection procedure, upon the order of the Board of Equalization, on October 1, or as soon as possible thereafter. His first step, if so ordered by the Board, is to post notices in at least three public places in each voting or justice precinct stating the time and place taxpayers are to meet him to pay their taxes. Such notices must be posted at least 2O days previous to the date set. The collector must remain in each designated place at least two days.” If the taxpayer fails to pay in his precinct at the appointed time, he must come to the office of the collector to pay.“ Some of the smaller counties have an informal arrange- ment whereby all taxpayers in the county come to the collector’s office to pay their taxes. Payments can be made at any time before January 31 of the next succeeding year for which taxes were assessed.“ If, however, a property owner has paid one-half of the taxes levied on his property on or before November 30, he may pay the remainder, without penalty, on or before June 30 of the following. year?” In cases where common school dis- trict taxes are collectible from the same roll with any other tax, any tax- payer of any common school district may pay one-half or all of such a tax prior to payment of any other tax.“ Discounts for Prompt Payment As an inducement to prompt payment of taxes, the voters of the State adopted in 1937 Section 20 of Article 8 of the Constitution, providing for discounts. In 1939, the legislature allowed the following discounts on the payment of all county and State ad valorem taxes: 3 per cent if paid 90 days before the date they would otherwise become delinquent; 2 per cent if paid 60 days before they would otherwise become delinquent; 1 per cent if paid 30 days before they would otherwise become delinquent. If taxing units other than the State and county wish to allow these discounts, they may do so by the passage of a resolution or ordinance to that effect. These discounts, however, are not applicable to split payment of taxes.“ Tax Receipts Upon receiving payment, the collector or his deputy is to issue a tax receipt, stating the specific amount of State, county, and district taxes; the year or years for which taxes are levied; number of acres of land in each separate tract; number of abstract; name of original grantee; name “Art. 7254. “Art. 7253. “Supp” Art. 7255. 811m towns of 7,000 or more, collector may appoint a deputy to collect taxes. In all counties having a population of more than 70,000 and containing one or more towns or cities, other than county seat, with population in excess of 1,000, collector may appoint a deputy in each of these towns. Art. 7256. “Art. 7336. “Art. 7336. “Art. 7336c. "Supp" Art. 7057d. ._..~.‘.¢.. ‘.4. 1;‘ -....'__......» hr»..- ma... “L. -..- QaJAQAL-nmi.‘ a W-awv-uulpwmmazmmlmamfimniaisr; a .... _4nA-A4_. am... . A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS i7 of city or town; total value of property assessed. The duplicate is to be recorded in the county clerk’s office, being filed in the same manner as a deed to land and entered in a tax receipt recor 3"‘ Protection 0f Funds Collected Bonding of Collector The. State attempts to hold the collector of taxes accountable for the honest disposition of monies he receives by requiring him to give bond be- fore entering upon his duties as assessor-collector. The bond he gives for the State tax must be equal to 10 per cent of the State taxes levied in the county as shown by the last preceding assessment; but the bond is not to exceed $50,000. The bond must be based upon unencumbered real estate of three “good and sufficient sureties” to be approved by the commission- ers court and the Comptroller, and the bond deposited in the -Comptroller’s office." As a prerequisite to collecting county taxes, the collector must give a similar bond, approved by commissioners court, to the county judge.“ In either case a bonding company may be used in place of indi- viduals. The collector may be required-to furnish new bonds or additional security when, in the opinion of the commissioners court or of the Comp- troller, it is advisable. If he fails to do this, the collector may be sus- pended from office by the commissioners court and later remove-d in a suit initiated by the Attorney General.” If the collector appoints deputies, he may require from them such bonds as he considersnecessary to protect himself. For he is always liable and accountable for the conduct of his deputies.” Reports and Deposits of Funds Public funds are also protected by the requirement that once a week the collector pay 9O per cent of all funds collected for the county and State to the county and State Treasurers respectively. The commissioners court or the Comptroller may ask the collector at any time for a sworn statement as to the amount of money collected during the current month, and for a report on the amount of taxes in the county depository belong- ing to the county and State. They may direct that 90 per cent of such funds be transferred to the county or State Treasury.” At the end of each month, the collector pays over to the State and county treasurers funds colleced during the month, exempting such amounts as he is allowed as his commission. On or before July 1 of each year the collector is required finally to adjust and settle his accounts, and turn over all balances belong- ing to the State and county." The Comptroller or commissioners court may also require a sworn oath from the depository as to the amount of funds in its hands under control of the tax collector. Failure of the collector to make remittances as described above or to render statements demanded within three days of date due constitutes a misdemeanor and is punishable by a fine, not to exceed $200.” “Supp” Art. 7258. "Supp, Art. 7247. “Supp” Art‘. 7249. “Art. 7248. "°Supp., Art. T252. “Supp” Art. 7249a. “Art. 7260; Supp, Art. 7261. “Art. 7249a. 18 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ‘Q The collector must also prepare, on forms furnished by the Comp-Q troller, a monthly report on both State and county tax collections. This? report is to be an itemized account showing each and every ad valorem,~ poll, and occupational tax collected during the month. It also is to contain? a statement showing the full disposition of all taxes collected. The correct- ness of the report is to be verified by the county clerk or county auditor,< who checks it against tax receipt stubs which the collector also submits to; him. The report, thus certified by the clerk or the auditor, is forwarded by the collector to the Comptroller and the commissioners court.“ Thus, it is seen that the responsibility for seeing that the above provisions are cor- f rectly and honestly executed by the collector, is shared by the commis-g sioners court and the Comptroller. “ l Q Protection of Taxpayer's Rights: ‘Taxpayefs Suits and Remedies Enjoining Collection of Tax 3 It is a well established principle that an injunction against the col-L lection of a tax will not be granted where there are adequate remedies at law. From court decisions it can be discovered that an injunction is avail- able on several particular grounds: (1) that the tax is unconstitutional; (2) that the tax was added to the rolls by the Board of Equalizationf rather than the assessor; (3) that the collector attempted to collect on a l valuation higher than the plaintiff rendered, without authorization by the _ Board of Equalization to make the increase; and (4) that the property is outside the jurisdiction of the taxing authority.“ ' Payment and Recovery of Back Taxes When a tax has been illegally assessed against a person, he may pay the tax under protest. Mere protest, however, will not support a recovery ~ of the amount paid unless the payment is “involuntary?” Generally speaking, a payment is involuntary when made to prevent loss of title to property or they casting of a cloud upon the title by a threatened proceeding of sale for taxes.” A suit for recovery of a tax paid may be brought against the taxing authority itself, if the money has already been paid over by the collector,” on the ground that the taxing authority assumed responsibility for the legality of the assessment by transmitting the tax rolls to the collector.” . COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT TAXES Penalties for Tax Delinquency Property becomes tax delinquent when (1) taxes levied upon it are ~ not paid in full on or before January 31 of the next succeeding year for 7 which they were assessed, when one-half of taxes were not paid on or be- fore November 30; or (2) if, the first half being paid on or before Novem- ber 30, the second half is not paid by June 30 of the following year.‘°° ~. - .4. h: , “Art. 7260; SUDIL, Art. 7261. “Texas Jurisprudence, Vol. 40, p. 139. See also Rowland v. City of Tyler, (Com. App.) 5 S. W. (2d) 758, (1928); Court v. O’Conner, 65 Tex. 334 (1886). wContinental Land & Cattle Co. v. Board, 80 Tex. 489, 16 S. W. 312, (1891). "Galveston Gas Co. v. County of Galveston, 54 Tex. 287, (1881). “Austin National" Bank v. Sheppard (Com. App.) 71 S. W. (Zd) 242, (1934). “(Galveston County v. Galveston Gas Co, 72 Tex. 509, 10 S. W. 583 (1889). 1° Art. 7336. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 19 Once property becomes tax delinquent, penalties begin to accrue. If a property owner does not pay one~half of his tax before November 30, and then fails to pay his full tax before February 1, the following penalty is imposed upon him: During February, 1 per cent of amount of his taxes; March, 2 per cent; April, 3 per cent; May, 4 per cent; June, 5 per cent; and on and after July 1, 8 per cent. If a person has paid one-half of his taxes 0n or before November 30, and then fails to pay the remainder by June 30, a penalty of 8 per cent accrues on the unpaid portion of his taxes. Moreover, all delinquent taxes bear interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of their delinquency. Penalties and interest, when paid by the delinquent taxpayer, are to be distributed to State, county, and district in proportion to taxes due each taxing unit.“ One of the most demoralizing features of the delinquent tax collection procedure is the legislative practice of periodically remitting penalties and interest on overdue taxes. This unnecessary leniency on the part of the legislature removes all incentive for payment of taxes when due. As a matter of fact, those taxpayers who “skimp and save” to pay their taxes every year are severely penalized for their thrift and honesty. Moreover, assessor-collectors are almost unanimous in their condemnation of this legalized method of encouraging delinquency. The task of collection, a difficult one under the best conditions, becomes almost an impossibility when the taxpayer discovers that he will suffer no punishment for nonpay- ment. Establishment and Transfer of Tax Liens All taxes upon real property constitute a superior lien on that prop- erty until they have been paid. Although a taxpayer may have made an assignment of his property for payment of debts, or although his property may have been levied upon by creditors, unpaid taxes remain the first lien upon the property. If property comes into the hands of an assignee, any unpaid taxes must be paid by him?” Although a lawful assessment is prerequisite to a lien)“ back taxes assessed upon property, which the assessor has failed to list for any one year or more, constitute a lien for every year he has failed to assess such property.“ In order that a lien for taxes may attach, in assessing it the land must be so described that the parcel on which the lien is claimed is identifiable?” If a taxpayer does not render his several tracts as a unit, a lien cannot be attached on them as a single tract. Thus, the owner may free part of his lands from liens by paying taxes on individual tracts?” The delinquent taxpayer has the legal right to have the tax lien upon his property transferred to a private person by allowing such a person to pay his taxes. It is the duty of the collector to transfer to any person who pays the taxes due on real property, at the formal written request of the owner, tax liens held by the State, county or subdivisions. The provisions for the transference of tax liens are designed to protect the property owner in such transactions. The collector makes the transfer only upon the “nArt. T336. ‘“'-'Art. 7269. “State v. Farmer, 94 Tex. 232, 59 S. W. 541, (1900). IMAM. 7172. “Slaughter v. City 0f Dallas, 101 Tex. 315, 107 S. W. 88, (1908). “mState Mortgage Corp. v. Ludwig, 121 Tex. 268, 48 S. W. (2d) 950 (1932). v ‘will’ i0 BULLETTN No. 64s, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION - ¥ written request of the owner; and he must certify in writing that such at transaction has occurred. Both written documents should be filed with the county clerk. For the lien holder to charge more than 8 per cent interest on taxes, penalty, interest and costs paid by him is declared to be usury,f and is punishable as such. The lien holder cannot foreclose for at least a 12 months from the date of payment of the taxes. At any time after 6i months from date of payment of the tax, the holder of a prior lien has‘ the right to extinguish the lien by paying the tax lien holder the amount '5 paid by him, plus the accrued interest and the expenses of recording their lien. After 12 months from the date of filing the transfer of the lien with, the county clerk, and in accordance with the time agreed upon by the. owner of the property and holder of the tax lien, the holder may sue to ‘ foreclose the lien. The proceeds of the sale are to be applied first on court costs, and secondly on the judgment, including interest, and attor- neys’ fees (not to exceed 10 per cent). If there is a balance left, other, lien holders are to be paid in the order of their priority. Any remaining 1 balance is returned to the owner of the property.“ ' ‘Suits to Foreclose Tax Liens The judicial sale, i.e., the sale of property after the tax lien has been foreclosed by court action, is the only method now used by the State, county, or other taxing units in Texas to sell delinquent real estate for‘ taxes?“ Notification of Delinquency During the month of July of each year, the county tax collector is re- L, quired to mail notices to the tax roll addresses of all owners of delinquent . lands, giving a statement of the amount of taxes due the State or county i and a descripion of the lots or parcels upon which taxes are delinquent, The collector’s notice also warns the delinquent taxpayer that if the 3 amount of taxes, interest, and penalties set forth in the notice is not paid f within 30 days, suit will be brought to foreclose the tax lien. If the person f“ notified pays the amount specified in the notice before the instituion of suit, the tax collector gives him a receipt, and proceedings to foreclose are not entered?” zé i} Employment of Delinquent Tax Contractors i Although the county attorney is required by statute to file suit for; collection of State and county taxes, other statutes permit the employmenti} of _ a private attorney to perform this task, with the approval of the Comp-i‘ troller and the Attorney General. Thus, in many counties the institutionl? 1°"Art. 7345a. Provision is made for redemption by the owner in case of foreclosure and Moreover, this statute does not abridge the property owner’s rights to contract for the?‘ payment of his delinquent taxes on terms other than those prescribed above. 1°8Another method of sale known as summary sale,i.e., seizure and sale of property by an nd-v ministrative officer without a suit in court, was formerly used in Texas. In 1929, mary sale of delinquent real estate was forbidden by law. Art. 7328a. In 1932, an amend-Q ment to the Texas Constitution (Art. 8, Sec. 13) directed the legislature to provide “for; the speedy sale without the necessity of a suit in court, of a sufficient portion of all; lands and other property for the taxes due thereon . . . ” Since the legislature has notf‘ seen fit to comply with this constitutional directive, it is extremely doubtful that taxing.‘ units now have authority to employ the summary sale method. The meaning of the 0011-. ~ stitutional amendment was before the Texas Supreme Court in the case of Mexia Inde-f pendent School District v. City of Mexia-—123 Tex. 95, 135 S. W. (2d) 118, 1939——but mthe court's decision did not clarify the applicability of the summary sale method. Art. 7324. . A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 21 and prosecution of tax foreclosure suits have been turned over to private attorneys appointed on a contract-commission basis?” Institution of Suit by Taxing Unit The State, county, city, town or other district with authority to levy and collect taxes may bring suit for the collection of delinquent taxes. The governmental unit instituting suit for the foreclosure of a tax lien may implead as defendant all other units of government claiming taxes due on the property in question. If the other units concerned are not made de- fendants, the suing unit must notify the other units concerned that suit is being brought, the court having jurisdiction, and give a description of the property. These notices are to be sent to the county tax collector when the State and county taxes are delinquent on the property and to the tax collector of the other units of government involved?“ Citation of Defendant Parties Except for certain special requirements, tax foreclosure suits must be conducted in we same manner and must observe the same requirements as ordinary foreclosure suits in private litigation?“ All persons known to have a legal interest in the real property in- volved should be joined as defendants to the suit. It is necessary, for ex- ample, that the owner and record lien holders be made parties to the suit?“ According to judicial interpretation, certain other interested persons are “proper” but not “necessary” parties. Included in the category of “proper” parties are minor heirs of the tax debtor,“ and the wife of the tax debtor in a suit to foreclose the lien on the marital homestead, unless the Wife is a record joint owner?“ From cases elucidating this nice distinc- tion between parties it can be deduced that, although better practice would suggest the joining of both “necessary” and “proper” parties as de- fendants, the suit and the subsequent judgment are not nullified by. failure to make merely “proper” persons parties to the suit. Parties having an interest in the property against which the fore- closure suit is sought must be personally notified of the pending suit. If, however, the owners are unknown to the attorney prosecuting the suit, they may be notified once a week for two consecutive Weeks through a newspaper published in the county in which the property is located. The same procedure is applicable to the notification of nonresidents and of un- known heirs of a deceased former owner. Among other things, the pub- lished notice must show the names of all plaintiffs, interveners and de- "°Arts. 7335, 7335a. mSupp. Art. 7345b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Texas (1941). Although the provisions of this article supplement other statutes and repeal only those portions of former statutes which conflict with it, the provision for notification of all other interested governmental units imposes upon the suing unit an additional re- quirement to those required by Art. 7328, which provides for foreclosure of tax liens in- dividually by governmental units. Willacy County Water Control and Improvement Dis- trict No. 1 v. Lewis (Civ. App.) 119 S. W. (2d) 159, (1938). “Supp. Art. 7345b as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Texas, (1941). “Art. 7328, as amended by Ch. 303, Laws, (1941). “Baldwin v. State (Civ. App.) 95 S. W. (2d) 1354 (1936). “~"Harris v. Mayfield (Com. App.), 260 S. W. 835 (1924). 22 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION fendants, the court in which the suit is pending, date for appearance brief general description of the property, and the amount of taxes 3, each intervener and plaintiff, exclusive of costs, penalties and interest.’ 1 As prerequisite to giving notice by publication, the prosecuting a _ ney must make affidavit to the effect that he has made the dilii search required by the courts and that the names and addresses of i=5 owners or nonresidents are “unknown to the attorney . . . . and after quiry cannot be ascertained?“ Defense Against Tax Suits According to statutory provisions, the only defenses against a suit I the collection of delinquent taxes are: that the taxes sued for have w» paid; that the defendant did not own the land at the time suit was fil and that the taxes for which suit is brought are in excess of the limit, in which case the defense extends only to the amount of the cess.” From court decisions, however, the following defenses appear to A, available in addition to the limitations enumerated in the above statui lack of power to impose tax; land not within the boundaries of the t ' unit; and land exempt from taxes.” Judgment, Order of Sale The court’s foreclosure judgment in favor of the taxing units m contain the court’s estimate of the property’s value, called the “adjud value,” as of the date of the trial. The judgment must also be acco panied by an order of sale, which specifies the details of the ‘forthco sale?” .9 Tax Sales . On the date specified by the court order the property is offered fl“ sale. The sale, however, may be postponed by the sheriff, or other offi in charge of the sale, in order that there may be competition?“ When the court order specifically directs that the property be offe =33 for sale by separate tracts and lots, the order must be complied wit-h. Moreover, the owner is authorized by law to request, at any time befol the sale, that the property be divided and sold in separate parcels o” tracts. When so divided, only the number of subdivisions necessary to sa J isfy the judgment can be sold?” In this case, a separate lien attaches I each parcel or tract of land upon which taxes are delinquent. Thus, unle “Supp” Art. 7345b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of State of Te (1941). In addition to Art. 7345b, Art. 7342, as amended by Ch. 303 of the General an Special Laws of the State of Texas (1941) deals with citation of unknown owners, _; indicated in Art. 7345b, Arts. 2021 to 2034 are applicable when defendant is resident 0 State, and Art. 2038 applies when defendant is nonresident. In so far as they do note co flict, these statutes are cumulative, and constitute the many technicalities necessary 1 correct citation. ‘ i a mSupp" Art. 7342, as amended by Ch. 303, General and Special Laws of the State of Tex (1941). See also State v. Bagby’s Estate (Civ. App.), 126 S. W. (2d) 687 (1939). - mArt. 7329. 11°Conklin v. City of El Paso, (Civ. App.) 44 S. W. 879 (1897): State v. Davidson (Olv App.) 280 S. W. 292 (1926). j ‘Z’°Supp., Art. 7245b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Tex ~ (1941). ' mWeinfield v. Cocke, (Civ. App.) 60 S. W. (2d) 842 (1933). mMills v. Pitts, 121 Tex. 196, 48 S. W. (2d) 842 (1932). mArt. 7328. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 23 the owner has neglected to render his property separately, several tracts of land cannot be sold as a unit?“ The law provides that real property sold for taxes may not be sold for less than the adjudged value placed upon the property by the court, or the aggregate amount of judgments against the property, whichever is less. A taxing unit having a claim against the property can, however, “pur- chase” the property for less than either of these amounts?“ “Purchase” by a taxing unit does not involve a monetary transaction. Rather, it is mere- ly the “bidding in” of property, a bookkeeping device. A sale is not complete until the amount of the bid has been paid?“ The sheriff makes a tax deed to the purchaser or to whatever person the purchaser may direct?” The net proceeds of the sale must be distributed to all taxing units found by the court to have a lien on the property, in proportion to the amount of their respective tax liens as established in the judgment of the court. Proceeds over and above the costs of suit and sale and other expenses necessary to discharge the judgment must be paid to the “parties legally entitled to sucih excess.”"“ The law is complete and specific in its requirements that suit should be filed against delinquent property owners and, upon an order of fore- closure, that such property should be sold for taxes. Nowhere does it give the option of foreclosing or not foreclosing. Nevertheless, in ‘actual practice foreclosure suits and sales of delinquent property are the excep- tions rather than the rule. Redemption of Property Sold for Taxes For a period of two years following the sale, the owner, his heirs, assigns or legal representative can redeem the property?” The term “owner” has been construed to include all who have any interest, right or title in the land?“ such as, mortgagees and lienholders under a trust deed. An amendment to Article 8 of the Constitution in 1932, provides for redemption payments as follows: “Section 13. (1) Within the first year of the redemption period upon the payment of the amount of money paid for the land, including one ($1.00) dollar tax deed recording fee and all taxes, penalties, interests and costs paid plus not exceeding twenty-five (25%) per cent of the aggregate total; “(2) Within the last year of the redemption period upon the payment of the amount of money paid for the land, including one ($1.00) dollar tax deed recording fee and all taxes, penalties, inter- ests and cost paid plus not exceeding fifty (50%) per cent of the aggregate total.” “4State Mortgage Corp. v. Ludwig, 121 Tex. 268, 48 S. W. (2d) 950 (1932). mSupp") Art. 734b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Texas, 1941 . mBuckholts v. Alsup, (Civ. App.) 5.6 S. W. (2d) 301. “Art. 7330. ‘2”Supp., Art. 7il45b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Texas (1941). “-"’Supp.,) Art. 734b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Texas (1941 . “Jackson v. Maddox (Civ. App.), 117 S. W. 185 (1909). 131811101», Art. 2345b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State 24 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION \ In 1937 the legislature fixed the redemption rates at the maximum M vided by the amendment.“ ’ i The purchaser cannot take possession of the property until the.“ demption period has expired. Judgments in suits to foreclose tax L‘ must provide for the issuance of a writ of possession to the purc M within 20 days after the termination of the redemption period?” - Resale of Property Bid Off to Taxing Unit When one of the taxing units party to the foreclosure suit “ chases” the land to hold it for the benefit of itself and the other u“, adjudged to have a lien against the property, the purchasing unit offer the land for sale. It cannot,‘ however, sell the land for less than- adjudged fair value, or the aggregate judgments against it, without written consent of the other units concerned?” If the purchasing unit fails to sell the land within six months r the expiration of the redemption period, the sheriff, upon the written quest of any taxing unit holding a lien, offers the land for sale to _ highest bidder at the county courthouse. Notice of the forthcoming . must-be given in the regular manner prescribed for the sale of real esta ' under execution. The notice of sale must include a description of the 1 A the date of its purchase and the taxing unit that purchased it, the p paid for the land by the purchasing taxing unit, the date and place of forthcoming sale, and that the land will be sold to the highest bidder.‘“_ ‘ At the sale, which is to be conducted in the manner of the salef, real estate under execution, the sheriff is required to reject all bids wh he considers insufficient. In the event that no bids are accepted by sheriff, the property is to be later readvertised and again offered for c: Acceptance of the bid by the sheriff is conclusive proof of the suffici . » of the bid, and the courts will not entertain an action to set aside the = i except on grounds of fraud or collusion.” The sheriff deducts from W proceeds all expenses incurred in the sale and original suit, and then p rates the remainder among the taxing units participating in the origi A 1 Texas (1941). The above constitutional provision relates to redemption directly f -- the purchaser. The legislature, however, has provided that any person having the rig to redeem the land sold for taxes may do so, within the two-year period, by paying t p. amount prescribd by law to the county tax collector, provided the person seeking to " deem makes affidavit that he cannot locate the purchaser of his property or that the I chaser is a nonresident of his county, or that he cannot agree with the purchaser on 15'" _ amount of redemption money. Upon payment in this manner the tax collector must gi > a receipt to the redeemer, and upon the purchaser’s demand, pay to the purchaser .7 - redemption money. Art. 7284. According to court interpretation, redemption is not effected by a mere tender i; the redemption money. But if the purchaser refuses the money when offered, the own; may institute suit to enforce his right to redeem. In a case of this nature, the burden proof is upon the owner to show that he tendered the money to the purchaser within l; two-year redemption period. Blanton v. Nunley (Civ. App.), 119 S.W. 881 (1909) ; McGra .,,, v. Potts (Civ. App.) 27 S. W. (2d) 550 (1930); Washington v. Giles (Civ. App.) 2,, S. W. 900 (1924). mSupp" Art. 7345b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State Texas (1941). 133Ibid. 134Ibid. , . mFraud or collusion will not be lightly presumed, even when the price accepted by sheriff seems unreasonably low. For example, a presumption of fraud is not created lflgii the sale of real property worth approximately $800.00, and encumbered by liens for linquent taxes aggregating $250.00 which accrued prior to the taxes for which the fordif‘ closure suit was brought, for a price of $100.00. Robinson v. State (Civ. App.). S. W. (2d) 629 (1940). .. * A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 25 ldgment in proportion to the established amount of their tax liens against 7‘>. property. The present law contemplates that all delinquent real estate shall be ivertised and put up for sale again and again until it eventually finds its ay back into private ownership——if not at a price that will bring in tax )1 earages, then at whatever lesser figure will move it back into private nds. This system does not make provision for the disposal of land that p‘ private purchaser wants to buy, nor for the proper handling of proper- d» s that remain delinquent for a very long period of time before some v rchaser finally appears on the scene. On the other hand, this system rmits tax-forfeited properties to be sold off at a fraction of their true Lrth, thus depriving the taxing units of substantial revenues that could . p erwise be realized. 4 Validation of Tax Titles 1 ounds for Defeating Purchaser’s Title ~ The Constitution (Art. 8, Sec. 13) provides that the purchaser’s deed l» property sold for taxes, and not redeemed during the two-year redemp- f. period, “shall be held to vest a good and perfect title in the purchaser ereof, subject to be impeached only for actual fraud.” Texans who have ' bled on the validity of tax titles, however, Well know that this guar- H of “good and perfect title” is not reliable. There is always the ‘j- ong likelihood, if the property is of any considerable value, that some rson entitled to do so may later prosecute a successful suit in trespass l1 try title. If the purchaser at a tax sale desires a marketable title to - land, he is almost compelled to bring an expensive court action to ‘ar his title at some time after the expiration of the redemption period. - numerous are the possibilities of defeating a tax title that oil com- nies, for example, ordinarily refuse to purchase land that has been sold ir taxes. ’ p, The reason that tax titles must generally be regarded as anything but ood and perfect” is that the courts have usually insisted that all techni- jities in the process leading to the final taking of title must have been z rally fulfilled. These technicalities are numerous and exacting; and the ances that some misstep will have occurred are legion. _ It is not possible to give an exhaustive list of all technical errors that l - courts at one time or another have deemed sufficient to upset a tax le; but it is possible to mentioned some of the most common grounds. och grounds as illegal assessment of the tax, that the taxes alleged to v delinquent had actually been paid, that the foreclosure suit had not been g~= in a court of competent jurisdiction, or that the judgment or sale ' erroneous, are easily understandable?“ But more frequently the issues p around alleged defective citation of interested parties. FAn erroneous foreclosure judgment or an improperly conducted tax sale may defeat the i“ tax title. For example, a judgment ordering foreclosure of several tracts of land as a single unit is erroneous, unless the owner failed to render his tracts of land separately. State Mortgage Corp. v. Ludwig, 121 Tex. 268, 48 S. W. 941 (2d) (1932). Likewise, the ‘ sheriff’s failure to follow the instructions of the court in the conduct of the sale may prove fatal to the purchaser's title. In the words of the Texas Supreme Court, “Nothing H, is better settled than. that the authority of the sheriff to pass . . . title at a sale under foreclosure by decree of court rests upon the decree and the order of sale . . . If the de- _ cree and the order of sale fail to authorize such a sale as the sheriff undertook to make, no title passes thereby." Mills v. Pitts, 126 Tex. 196, 48 S. W. (2d) 950 (1932). 26 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Limitation on Title Conveyed by Tax Deed In 1941 the legislature provided that “the term ‘all liens and claims A for ad valorem taxes’ shall never be construed to include assessments for maintenance and operation purposes on a pro rata basis per acre against irrigable lands authorized by law to be made by water improvement dis- tricts, or water control and improvement districts, and no judgment fore- closing such liens and claims for ad valorem taxes shall ever prejudice the collection of said assessments or the liens securing same?” Thus, if the land acquired at a tax sale is subject to a lien for taxes held by a water improvement district, or Water control and improvement district, the pur- chaser’s title is still encumbered by that lien. Statute of Limitation If some years after the date of purchase, court action is sought to break the purchaser’s title to the property, he may plead the protection of any one of the 5 statutes of limitation which is applicable to the particu- lar case. None of the statutes of limitations, however, applies exclusively to tax title cases. Four-year Statute. The limitation statute most frequently relied upon by claimants under a tax title in a suit of trespass to try title is the four- year statute?” It provides that, “Every action other than for the recovery of real estate, for which no limitation is otherwise prescribed, shall be brought within four years next after the right to bring the same has ac- crued and not afterward.” In respect to tax titles, the period of limitation begins to run two years after the tax deed is recorded, which would ordi- narily be the date on which the redemption period expires?” Neither this nor any of the other statutes present an absolute bar to an attack upon a tax title after the specified period has run. In the words of the court: “If . . . the judgment is absolutely void no period of time under any statute of limitation could give the judgment validity?“ Furthermore, limitation does not begin to runagainst an interested party who had no knowledge of the suit until the time that he should have known of the proceedings by the exercise of reasonable diligence?“ The court, therefore, determines in each individual case presented to it, if and when the statute of limitation began to run against the unnotified party who institutes the suit. Limitation ‘Through “Peaceable and Adverse” Possession?“ Four stat- utes of limitation, falling under this heading and providing different periods of limitation, are applicable to tax title cases. In general, the 3- year, 5-year, 10-year, and 25-year statutes of limitation“ provide that suits to recover real estate from a person who is in peaceable and adverse pos- “Supp, Art. 7345b, as amended by Ch. 534, General and Special Laws of the State of Texas (1941). 138Art. 5529. “Texas Jurisprudence, Vol. 40, p. 309. “°Mote v. Thompson (Civ. App.) 156 S. W. 1105 (1913). Here the judgment was void for want of jurisdiction on the part of the court having given the tax judgment. “lHarrison v. Orr (Com. App.) 296 S. W. 87.1 (1927); Robinson v. State (Civ. App.) 143 s. W. (2a) 629 (1940). “wPeaceable possession” is possession that is acquiesced in by all persons, including rival claimants. “Adverse possession” is “the actual, open, and notorious possession and en- joyment of real property . . . continued for a certain length of time, held adversely and in denial and opposition to the title of another claimant . . . ” Blaclfs Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.). “3Arts. 5507, 5509, 5510, and 5519, respectively. A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 2T ssion of the property must be brought Within the specified time after , e accrual of the action and not afterward. Although the specific re- uirements for claiming under the statutes vary somewhat, oftentimes the éolder of a tax title is_ in position to claim title under two or three of A _ ese statutes simultaneously. Payment of all taxes before they become elinquent is also a strong circumstance in “peaceable and adverse posses- on.” v These statutes of limitation undoubtedly afford some protection to the urchaser at a tax sale who intends to hold, occupy, and cultivate or therwise use the land for a number of years. As has already been pointed ut in the discussion of the four-year statute of limitation, the protection 4: by no means perfect. Moreover, these statutes are of no benefit to the ‘urchaser who wishes to secure a marketable title immediately upon the rmination of the redemption period. What appears to be needed is a tute of limitation, applicable to tax titles exclusively, which would have pe effect of absolutely barring all suits to defeat a tax title after the ipiration of a certain prescribed period. A mpensation to Defeated Tax Title Holder If a purchaser’s tax title is defeated, he may file claims in court for ‘mpensation for the improvements he made upon the property in “good aith” while he was in possession?“ The court decides whether he was an ‘innocent purchaser” and if the improvements were made in “good faith,” d what compensation is due him. Although he may have been innocent i m the layman’s point of view, he is by no means certain of being _warded compensation for the improvements he made. The defeated tax title holder may also file claims for the recovery of _“ e amount he paid for the property. That he cannot be at all sure of re- ‘vering his original investment, however, has been plainly stated by the urtsm: “The mere fact a party pays money upon the purchase of prop- rty at a tax sale does not entitle him to recovery of the amount paid, hen years later he is unsuccessful in an attempt to establish his title in pn action of trespass to try title.” A A recent case decided by a Texas Court of Civil Appeals is illus- ative of the unfair burden placed upon the purchaser of tax delinquent roperty in an action to recover the amount paid for the property?“ Land longing to A was delinquent. Suit was brought to foreclose the tax _ en, and the land was subsequently purchased by B at the tax sale. Later, _‘ a suit in trespass to try title, A was successful in defeating B’s tax ‘Atle on the ground that A, the record owner, wasinot personally notified p the original suit to foreclose the tax lien. Having thus been defeated I“ his title, the purchaser, B, filed a claim for recovery of the amount he i d paid for the property at the sale and subsequent taxes he had paid on A A, In support of his claim, he testified that he believed that “he was ob- pining good title to the property, and believed that he had good title iereto at the time he paid the additional taxes thereon.” B’s claims for icovery were denied by the court on the grounds that, although he was i: “Arts. 739s, 7394. “Watson v.’ Tamez, (Civ. App.) 136 S. W. (2d) 645 (1940). - “American Realty Corporation v. Tinkler, (Civ.iApp.) 107 S. W. (2d) 627 (1937). 28 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION a “good faith” purchaser, he was not entitled to reimbursement by A, for A’s record of ownership was recorded in the courthouse and B should have known this before he purchased the land owned by A. Under the law, the purchaser at a tax sale is expected to reexamine the attorney’s Work and to ascertain whether all necessary parties were properly cited. But the owner of the property is expected to make no in- quiries. In the case under discussion, A dial not claim that the assessment against his land was irregular nor that the taxes due under this assess- ment were not delinquent. Therefore, it can be assumed that A knew that his taxes were delinquent. The incongruous thing is the court’s holding that because B had not investigated the public deed records to discover that the record owner had not been cited in the suit under which the tax sale was ordered, B lost his entire investment. But A, for his part, al- though failing to investigate the delinquent tax rolls (also public records) which plainly showed that suit had been instituted to foreclose the tax lien on his land, escaped all payment of taxes, penalties and interest on his land. DISCUSSION OF REAL PROPERTY LAWS WITH SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT Assessment and Equalization The laws governing the administration of taxes on real property in Texas will allow sound and efficient administration. As in other phases of government, however, the responsible officials must be honest, well in- formed and conscientious if reasonably good results are to be secured. It is worthy of note that the county assessor-collector has the author- ity—indeed he has the duty-—of placing a value on any property which he believes the taxpayer has rendered for an improper value. This aspect of the law has not been emphasized sufficiently in previous publications which have discussed the real property tax system. Furthermore, the Commissioners Court as the Board of Equalization has the authority and the duty to require the assessor-collector to place fair and equitable values on all properties within the county. In case the assessor-collector does not carry out his responsibility, the Board of Equali- zation can refuse to approve the tax rolls, and in the last analysis, the Board can compel compliance with its wishes. As the governing board of the county, the Commissioners Court has the responsibility of maintaining continuing control over the assessor-col- . lector. The assessor-collector must give bond, and the Commissoiners Court must approve the monthly reports of tax collections. These powers are sufficient to secure orderly and efficient conduct of the assessor-col- lector duties, if they are really exercised by the Court. In conducting his office, the assessor-collector has sufficient legal authority to secure the information needed to make a complete and ac- curate assessment of all property in the county. Information on the sales prices of lands and buildings can be secured from the county clerk’s of- fice, and over a period of years an accurate map and plat system can be installed as an aid to the conduct of the office. While some officials have regarded the preparation of accurate maps locating and describing the A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWs 29 lands by plats, as an extremely costly procedure which could not be car- ried out by the regular office force, this need not be true. Some of the best systems in Texas have been installed by regular county employees ‘ under the supervision of the assessor-collector. Careful attention to the work of the office over a period of years will provide much of the in- ‘ formation needed. if Committees of Citizens Can Assist With further respect to the assessment of property, the assessor-col- lector could secure a great deal of assistance through the use of unpaid committees in assessing property in the respective communities. If these committee members were given appointments as deputy assessors, signed y rendition sheets could be secured as provided by law. Even though the committee members were not appointed as deputies, appraisals secured by , this means could be used by the assessor-collector to very good advan- ~ tage. g Similar committees could be used to great advantage by the Board of Equalization in passing on individual assessments. In Young County, ’ Texas, the Board of Equalization has utilized the findings of appraisal ‘ committees on both farm and ranch lands and city properties. In addition, ‘ similar but different committees have been used in passing on the valua- tions of other properties which had not been appraised by the committees which functioned prior to equalization. The Young County Board of ,_ Equalization is enthusiastic about the good results obtained through these ‘ committees and expects to continue the practice. z In this connection, it is worth noting that the use of such committees ; could eliminate the practice of employing large numbers of special assess- jing deputies who are paid at the rate of 15 cents per rendition, and con- ‘ij-sequently must do the work hurriedly in order to make decent wages. iThough most of these deputies have had little training for the job, this has little effect, for even a well trained man could not afford to take the ‘time to study the properties and arrive at values based on adequate in- iformation at the rate of 15 cents per rendition. It is also true that the use of committees to assist the Board of éEqualization could go a long way towards eliminating the criticisms which Iare often made of the equalization process. Critics maintain that the Com- ‘TJIIISSIOIIBTS Court has not accepted the responsibility which is placed upon fit by law and that, therefore, the equalization process has been ineffec- Tftively handled. The explanation usually offered is that the members of the lixlCommissioners Court, like the assessor-collector, are elected, and have a ieep-seated fear of antagonizing the voters. To the extent that this is "true, there seems to be a tendency to leave the valuations alone unless the {taxpayer registers a complaint. Under these circumstances, the taxpayer éiho protests year after year may get relief, but those who do not like to jcomplain get no relief even though their assessments may be out of line. gAs a means of improving the work of equalization, it has been suggested that the Commissioners Court be relieved of the duty of equalizing prop- herty but that the Court appoint a committee of citizens to act as a Board s: Equalization. This proposal has merit, but there is no assurance that a Commissioners Court would always be able or willing to appoint the best 30 BULLETIN NO. 645. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION qualified men for service on such boards- or that such men would accept named. And as stated earlier, the use of advisory committees could make I the work of the Commissioners Court as the Board of Equalization more; effective. In point of fact, the best assessors continue the work of assessing throughout the year and do not try to confine it to the few months during" which the law specifies that property shall be viewed. In other words, ’ such assessors collect information from all possible sources and arrange it % in usable form so that it will be readily available during the period from J January to April when signed renditions must be obtained from the own- i ers. . . This leads to another point, which is that no useful purpose seems to .1, be accomplished by requiring that the owner submit a value for his prop» erty. Too often the assessor-collector is encouraged to accept such rendi» ,1 tions as they are submitted even though he knows they are too low or too high. In these instances the assessor disregards the law which requires him to place his own valuation on such properties, and excuses his negli- gence on the grounds that the taxpayer should be blamed. The solution, if any, would seem to be to specify that the assessor was responsible for each valuation placed on the tax rolls, i.e., that it was in fact the assessor’s valuation and not one submitted by the taxpayer and merely allowed to stand by the assessor-collector. Of course the taxpayer should always 2 have the right to submit his idea as to what the valuation should be, but i the assessor-collector would merely take that into consideration. Such a 7 change should have the effect of fixing responsibility upon the assessor, whereas it is now divided between the taxpayer and the assessor. It should make the assessor “a real assessor” and not just a receiver of ren~ dition sheets—as is sometimes charged. More Equitable Assessments Needed The need for improvements in the equality of assessments is evidenced by numerous studies which indicate that small properties are usually valued proportionately higher than large properties in the same counties. A recent study in Young County shows that farms selling for $2,400 or less were assessed at 70 per cent or more of the sales price, whereas farms selling for $3,700 or more were assessed at 40 per cent or less of the sales price. Similar trends were found in each of the six major pro- duction areas of the county, and were also found in each of the cities . studied. Apparently it is a universal tendency of assessors, and perhaps of citizens as well, to think of the total dollars assessed instead of reduc- .. ing the assessment to a similar amount per acre regardless of the number of acres rendered by the individual. One means of improving the equality of assessments has already been discussed, namely, the use of committees of citizens in the several com- munities. Such citizens are familiar with the properties around them and have demonstrated their ability to establish a high degree of equality in _ appraising properties. Another and perhaps more fundamental means of improving the con- duct of assessing lies in the provision of better qualified officials and deputies. The constitution and the laws prescribe no qualifications as to A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 31 ‘training and experience, and consequently the election of well qualified assessor-collectors is largely a matter of chance. One suggestion which is often made is that candidates for assessor- ‘oollector be required to possess a certain amount of training and experi- rence in tax work, and that they be required to demonstrate their ability by passing an examination before their names are placed on the ballot. iThis suggestion is worthy of real consideration. A constitutional amend-_ jment would be required before such a change could be put into effect. It "is also often suggested that the term of the assessor-collector should be increased from two to four years thereby giving these officials a longer ‘period in which to learn their duties before they are obliged to campaign for reelection. p With respect to the deputies appointed by the elected assessor-col- ector, the legislature could pass a law requiring that they possess certain - ining and experience and that they pass an examination in order to be- jme eligible for appointment. If such a procedure were inaugurated, it 'ght develop that persons contemplating a race for the assessor-collect- r’s office would Want to take these examinations as a means of demon- rating ability to handle the job. g At the same time, it must be admitted that assessor-collectors can ap- ;;-- qualified deputies insofar as the limitations on salaries will permit h persons to be obtained. For example, it would be possible for an as- yssor-collector to appoint a lawyer as a deputy in order that all legal hases of the work might be properly-carried out. Such a deputy could u assist in collecting delinquent taxes as well as in other duties of the iffice. Further, the assessor-collector could appoint an engineer as a dep- ty in charge of the assessment of oil, utility and similar properties such A cotton gins, elevators, flour mills and ice plants. Such properties con- Q itute a large percentage of the valuation, in many counties, and there is doubt that such a deputy could assist materially in improving the as- psments involved. a Because they do not have one or more deputy assessors who possess Iineering training, many counties, as well as school districts, follow the p» tice of employing firms of appraisal engineers who recommend the lues to be placed on oil, utility and similar properties. i It has been mentioned that limitations on the salaries which can be "d might make it impossible for some counties to employ qualified depu- as who possessed legal or engineering training or who possessed other f ll rounded training in tax work. This is especially true in the smaller unties in which the sheriff serves as assessor-collector and usually ap- pints only one or two deputies. In these instances, the deputy in charge i assessing and collecting is forced to carry out a wide range of duties Zr which he is paid a relatively small salary. While the volume of work 'y not be too burdensome, the deputy needs to possess as much ability as ose in larger counties—if he is to do his work well. ‘ve County as a Unit for Assessment Purposes At this point another possibility arises. It will be recalled that many all cities as well as independent school districts employ their own as- 32 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION sessor-collectors-who must, therefore, assess and collect taxes from portion of the same property on which county and state taxes are paid the county assessor-collector. Since the volume of work is small in many of these cities and sch _ districts, it is often performed by the employment of temporary or p l time help or by giving these duties to someone who already has a full t" job. In either case, it is unlikely that the job of assessing and collec ' will be handled with anything approaching maximum efficiency. Moreov __ the division of assessing and collecting duties among three or moreoff ficials operating within the same general area is a source of confusion ‘ aggravation to many taxpayers. ‘ tribute the collections to the cities, schools, and other units of governmen for which they were collected. While the duplication of work would, ~5- in costs would accrue to the local governments affected. Necessarily county would have to deduct a fee from the collections for other govern-iii} ments in order to pay for the services involved. ' 1 if’? Nevertheless it is reasonable to suppose that some reduction in co; should be secured for the same quality of service which the cities = school districts are now providing for themselves. If the quality of serving‘ was increased, the additional cost might absorb the entire dollar and saving. ' r A more important possibility is that the additional volume of collec? tions handled by the single agency would make it possible for that agenc to employ qualified deputies and to develop an accurate map and plat syssa a tem and the other “aids” which a Well arranged tax office must possess init‘ order to make an equitable assessment and a good collection record. a‘ Despite the davantages of the single collection agency within each? county, it would not be feasible under the present constitutional limitationsgY; on tax rates. Independent school districts except in special cases, are limyg‘ ited to a tax rate of $1 per $100 of assessed valuation. Consequently, has been necessary for many districts to assess property at a higher levelip,‘ than the county uses, in order to raise the amount of taxes needed for op-- erating purposes and the retirement of debt. Hence, it would be necessary 5E to adopt a constitutional amendment before the single collection agency," could be utilized in all cases. Or as an alternative the state would have to; supplement local taxes through some form of aid in order to compensate, the school districts (or the cities) for any reductions in tax revenues oc-p? casioned by the change. Even so it would be possible for the advantages of the single agency? system to be secured—-insofar as equality of assessments is concerned-flit?‘ without changing the Constitution. This might be done through a cooperaff€i~ tive procedure agreed upon by all local governments within the countyéli; Under such an arrangement, the county and the various cities, independent‘, school and other districts would pool their information in arriving at meg? a Q ,_ d” 1;, i’ _ A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 33 100 per cent value of each piece of property in the county. Then each unit would apply its own level of assessment to each of the 100 per cent values so determined. This practice would go a long way towards insuring equality of assessments. State Agency Should Assess Utilities Although many improvements could be made by the local officials without changing the Constitution or the laws, other improvements can . hardly be secured without some action on the State level. For example, it has been stated that the employment of engineers as deputy assessors in charge of valuing utility, oil and similar properties would be a real step forward. But it has been admitted that the smaller counties can hardly be A expected to pay the salaries necessary to employ men possessing such qualifications. Moreover, the engineers in the larger counties would find it extremely difficult to value the property of utilities such as pipe lines which run through several counties. In other words, the engineer would have to determine the value of the entire pipeline installation in all counties before he could be sure that he had valued the portion within his county correctly. For these reasons, it is recommended that a State agency be given the duty of assessing the utility and similar properties which may cross the boundaries of several counties and other local governments Within those counties. The values arrived at would then be prorated to the various units of government in proportion to the amount of such property within each unit. Necessarily each unit of government and each company would be entitled to a full explanation of the procedures followed by the State agency; would have the benefit of equalization hearings; and could appeal to the courts for relief in case of abuse. At the present time, the various State agencies receive much informa- tion which is of value in determining the valuation of utilities, but such information is exceedingly difficult to use because most of it is not or- ganized for the use of assessors. Under the circumstances a relatively small staff could bring together the necessary information and determine and prorate the valuations. The total cost of such a set up would un- doubtedly be considerably less than the total amounts which local govern- ments are paying appraisal engineering firms each year. State Should Equalize Assessments Among Counties One of the most troublesome weaknesses in the real property tax sys- tem is that no method has been prescribed for the equalization of taxes as between counties. Since the State ad valorem taxes are levied against the assessment used for county purposes, competitive under-assessment of properties has arisen as a means of reducing the State taxes as muoh as possible. This procedure has meant a considerable loss of revenue to the State, has caused serious inequalities as between the assessment of simi- lar properties in different counties and has been particularly costly to the small counties which must assess at a relatively high level of true value in order to secure enough taxes for the operation of county government. Unlike Texas, most states have provided machinery for the equaliza- tion of assessments as between individual counties-thereby attempting to 34 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION place all counties on the same level. This need not mean an increase‘ taxes since the tax rate in any county could be changed sufficiently? keep the actual tax payments at the same total amount for the "N; One of two alternatives could be followed in Texas in providing equa' tion machinery. One alternative would be to place the duties upon State Comptroller of Public Accounts on the grounds that such would be a logical addition to those already performed by that officeci“ second alternative would be to create a board of three or more qua persons of which the State Comptroller as one member would be PM chairman. The other members should be appointed by the Governor. In either case, the staff utilized for the collection of informal needed for the purposes of equalization would be placed in the Si Comptroller’s office. Such a staff would be required to spend conside : _ time in the counties in order to determine the level of assessments w A j was actually being used. For example, the sales prices of lands p 5 buildings would be checked against the assessment made by the co l‘. In addition appraisals made by the Federal Land Bank, insurance Wif panies, and committees of citizens might all be utilized in determining y: i‘ level of assessment. i’ 1 i On the basis of these data, the State agency would arrive at the e valuation of all properties within the county. But in doing so, farm 1M: city properties, oil wells, and utilities would be considered separately. N in determining that the total assessment in a particular county was _ high or too low, the State agency would also determine whether pl change in value indicated should be applied to all properties or to i; lands, oil properties or other properties within the county. Further, f.‘ f: making use of land use planning data, including appraisals made by , ‘i mittees of citizens, changes in valuation could be applied to different s' of farms or city properties, as measured by dollars. Thus the long stan“ i practice of over-valuing small properties and under-valuing large w»; ties could be partially or wholly eliminated by this means. A At the same time it should be understood that in carrying out sup . duties, the State agency would not be allowed to dictate to the county q . ficials the assessed value to be placed on any particular piece of propertf. j 3 The changes made by the State agency would apply to all the property’ the county or to particular classes and sub-classes of property. w » county assessor-collector or the Board of Equalization would make the a: I; A plication to the properties affected by changing the assessments Sllffifiiélltfi ly to bring the total assessed valuations of the particular classes of propf i“ erty, and therefore of the entire county to the total sum specified by State agency. w, I . The field men used by the State agency in accumulating the informa- tion for purpose of equalization would be available to assist local officialpf in making the changes-but only in so far as the size of the staff and time available would permit. In reality a small staff working exclusive] on this problem could accomplish a great deal in bringing together necessary information. But if the staff _was also assigned the job of sisting local» officialsby preparing manuals of instruction, outlines of p cedures ifollowed» counties i-making the most equitable assessmen»; A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 35 and of holding schools of instruction at convenient points over the state, the size of the staff would need to be increased considerably. Nevertheless, it would not be necessary to provide a huge staff in order to go a long ways towards the equitable assessment of all properties in the State. This is true because the majority of the county officials want to do a good job and many of them are succeeding. These county officials could and would assist the State employees a great deal by making their experiences available to all concerned, and by helping in the conduct of training schools for assessor-collectors. Even though the State did not accept the responsibility of equalizing assessments between counties, it would be well for the State to provide a staff to assist local officials. The improvement in equality of assessments which could be secured through the work of such a staff would certainly be worth the expense involved. Collection of Real Property Taxes -The assessor-collector has sufficient authority to collect the taxes levied. Although the law merely provides that certain notices must be given the taxpayer, it does not prohibit the use of additional notices and other collection devices. The collector may send additional notices to in- dividual taxpayers, publish advertisements in newspapers, and make per- sonal calls if he desires to do so. The assessor-collector who makes a real effort to collect taxes will find it necessary to use several methods of informing the taxpayers and will take advantage of the opportunities so afforded to explain his duties to the citizens affected. The results obtained by such collectors include the collection of a high percentage of current taxes and consequently, the taxpayer is saved the additional cost of penalties and interest which are added to the taxes after they become delinquent. While county officials have the authority to collect delinquent taxes as outlined on pages 18-28, it is sometimes deemed advisable to contract with an attorney to make such collections. These contracts have served a use- ful purpose in that large amounts of taxes have been collected, but they are ordinarily quite expensive to the taxpayer. The penalties and interest from which the delinquent tax contractor is paid, could have been avoided if the taxes had been collected prior to delinquency. Under the law the fees paid delinquent tax contractors cannot exceed 15 per cent of the col- lections, and they usually range from 10 to 15 per cent in the various counties having such contracts. In many instances the contractors have‘ done little except to send notices to all delinquents—a procedure which could have been carried out as well by county officials. For this reason, the use of such contracts is often criticized on the grounds that only the easy collections are made, and the remainder stay on the delinquent tax rolls. Hence, little perma- nent improvement is secured. In a few counties special versions of the standard delinquent tax con- tracts have been worked out which eliminate some of the objectionable features. In these counties, an attorney has been employed at a fixed sal- ary to devote his full time to the job. While the standard contract (as pro- 36 BULLETIN NO. 645, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION vided by the State Comptroller and the Attorney General) is used, contract provides that the attorney is to receive 15' per cent or less of tax collections, but not to exceed a certain fixed sum per month. I. In the beginning the cost of collections will be low, but as the co tract continues and taxes become harder and harder to collect, the cost of‘ collections, as measured by the percentage of tax collections used for t purpose, will increase since the salary of the delinquent tax collector fixed. This is as it should be. p In case the contractor is allowed a fixed percentage of the collections; as the ordinary contract provides, his earnings will be extremely high while the first and easiest collections are being made, but will decline the volume of collections decrease. Thus, on a monthly basis, the co tractor is paid the most for making the easiest collections and is paid pro». gressively less as the collections decrease. This situation is intensified the fact that the work required increases as the collections decrease. Hence, the contractor often neglects to work his contract after the “cream is skimmed off.” i Collection Procedures Affect Equality of Assessments The importance of good collection procedures is not confined to collec j 1 tions alone, for they offer a real opportunity of improving the equality assessments as between individuals and properties. For example, iti g often stated that some individuals allow their taxes to go delinquent cause they believe their property has been assessed too high as comparedlglgi with the properties owned by their neighbors. To the extent that this ation and similar situations exist, a real effort to collect will undoubtedly bring the facts to light and provide the information needed to correct any-ii; inequalities revealed. -' Disposal of Tax Delinquent Lands p The procedure for collecting delinquent taxes and disposing of tax deéjg; linquent lands-—that is, the institution and prosecution of suits to foreclosef tax liens, the sale of property, and the clearance of tax titles-is unsatis-vi factory in that: (1) it is slow and needlessly complicated; (2) it is too. expensive; (3) it is ineffective, because it does not result in collectionfflépiji of a high percentage of delinquent taxes. I m [a Tax Foreclosure Suits and Clearance of Tax Titles Not only are foreclosure suits and sales, which are the instruments for s5? returning property to the tax rolls, infrequent; but they are slow, costly and needlessly complicated. To make the procedure simple, relatively in- expensive, and effective, the following remedy is suggested. i , To the end that tax foreclosure suits be made simpler, less expensivpgif; and more binding, it is recommended that the legislature adopt a strict in rem procedure for tax foreclosure suits. This procedure is based upon the theory that proceedings are against the tax delinquent land itselfyéf‘ rather than, its owner or others having an interest in it. Thus, rather than personally notifying every person having an interest in the land, it suf-fiz fices to publish a notification in the county newspaper. On the proper aS-fj‘ sumption that a taxpayer knows when his property is delinquent and ' }":"75*"i,‘§_'§"f‘$"§,5§ fir}. "é é ail A SUMMARY AND APPRAISAL OF TEXAS REAL PROPERTY TAX LAWS 37 A be presumed to have enough interest in it to keep track of its status, all interested persons are held to be notified by the mere publication of the ‘ newspaper statement. More specific notification must, however, be given to the last owner of record; but this requirement can be satisfied by mail- ing him a copy of the newspaper notice to his last known address. All in- terested parties, upon petition, would be entitled to have their rights ad- judicated at the subsequent foreclosure suit. Foreclosure suits for all taxing districts would be brought by county officials and would be instituted in the name of the State. To permit other units to bring suit would make the in rem procedure unworkable and unfair, for the taxpayer would only be able to discover if suit were being brought against his delinquent property by constantly investigating in their several locations the records of all of the taxing units having a lien on his property. The foreclosure suit would not occur until the property had been de- linquent for a specified period, for example, three years. The State would then receive a fee simple title to the property and the rights and equities of all other parties would be forever foreclosed. Thus, the two-year re- ' demption period following the sale of property would no longer be avail- able to the owner in its present form. Loss of the post-sale redemption privilege would in no way discriminate against the owner, for he would be allowed instead a period of grace, comparable with the redemption period, in which he could pay his taxes, plus penalties and interests, and forestall the original suit against his land. The period of grace would come before rather than after the foreclosure suit. If the period of grace occurred before rather than after-the foreclosure suit, taxing units would receive the redemption penalties which now go to tax purchasers, and de- linquent property holders could redeem their properties without paying p the costs of a tax foreclosure suit and sale. Recodification of Tax Laws Statutes on assessment, equalization, and collection are many and confused. The Texas legal codes contain a surprisingly large number of laws, passed at different times and located in different places in the code, which bear directly or indirectly upon the assessment and collection of taxes. These laws taken together impose a host of duties upon local of- ficials, but the laws so conflict and overlap that it is almost impossible for a person without legal training to make “heads or tails” of them. Since the assessor cannot be expected to be a trained lawyed as well as a property appraiser and clerk, it is important that the tax laws be so phrased and so organized that he (and the taxpayer as well) can refer to them with some assurance of finding the correct instructions, stated in an understandable manner. It is recommended, therefore, that the tax laws be recodified, that is, that they be reclassified, and brought together; that the laws which have been amended by subsequent acts of the State Legislature be revised ac- cordingly, and that laws which have been repealed be stricken from the code. The last recodification was carried out in 1925.