Ark. Code Ann. § 26-55-210 (2020)
Border tax rate areas generally
History. Acts 1941, No. 383, § 5; 1943, No. 252, § 1; 1953, No. 143, § 1; 1957, No. 312, §§ 1, 2; 1967, No. 406, § 1; 1967, No. 512, § 1; 1977, No. 378, § 1; 1979, No. 437, § 4; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 75-1107, 75-1107n, 75-1107.2; Acts 1997, No. 727, § 1.
Publisher's Notes. In reference to the term “passage of this section,” Acts 1941, No. 383 was signed by the Governor on March 26, 1941, and became effective on July 1, 1941.
Cross References. Rate of tax in city or town within one mile of city adjoining state line, § 26-25-104.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Ark. L. Rev.
Recent Development: Arkansas Constitutional Law - “Border City Exemption,” 58 Ark. L. Rev. 1005.
Case Notes
Constitutionality.
Acts 1931, No. 63 was not unconstitutional as granting special privileges or immunities nor as abridging the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Bollinger v. Watson, 187 Ark. 1044, 63 S.W.2d 642 (1933) (decision under prior law).
This section was held not void on ground it conflicted with § 26-55-230, which contains the only provisions for computation and collection of the tax and there is no provision in the law whereby it may be determined how much fuel has been sold and delivered into the tanks of auto owners' vehicles and how much was sold otherwise, since, under § 26-55-204, rules and regulations may be prescribed requiring dealers to report how much gasoline was sold by them under conditions not permissible at the preferential rate. Hardin v. Croom, 203 Ark. 519, 157 S.W.2d 520 (1942).
Construction.
When all of this section is read together, it appears clear that the legislative intent was to allow border dealers a preferential rate only in the circumstances stated. Hardin v. Croom, 203 Ark. 519, 157 S.W.2d 520 (1942).
Incorporated Towns.
Gasoline dealers in a town bordering on the state line and incorporated since the passage of act were held not entitled to exemption provided by Acts 1935, No. 147. Wiseman v. Omaha, 192 Ark. 718, 94 S.W.2d 116 (1936) (decision under prior law).
In suit to enjoin collection of motor vehicle fuel tax sold within town at a rate in excess of that provided by the laws of bordering state, exclusion of testimony that town, which was incorporated, included a strip of land a quarter of a mile wide and four miles long, that its land was agricultural, timber land, and bluff land and seven-eighths thereof was uninhabited except for isolated farm houses was error, since, under those facts, order of incorporation of the town would be void ab initio and subject to collateral attack. McCarroll v. Arnold, 199 Ark. 1125, 137 S.W.2d 921 (1940) (decision under prior law).
In suit to restrain collection of state taxes on sales of gasoline within corporate limits of border town, evidence justified trial court's holding that agricultural and timber lands included in the corporate limits were not needed for urban purposes nor intended to be used for urban purposes and that incorporation was void. Arnold v. McCarroll, 200 Ark. 1094, 143 S.W.2d 35 (1940) (decision under prior law).
Where single purpose actuating those who enlarged the territorial area of border town by embracing a narrow strip extending to within state boundary was to provide, by technical means, a method by which gasoline dealers might account for the equivalent of lower tax charged in adjoining state, citizen of state, after Attorney General had ruled in favor of state's view that only lesser rate should be charged, was entitled to bring suit against the state and to enjoin it from collecting only the lesser tax as charged in the adjoining state. Park v. Hardin, 203 Ark. 1135, 160 S.W.2d 501 (1942).