O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 47-3-28 (2019)

Rights exempted from levy and sale, garnishment, and other process; assignability; exemptions for other retirement systems; assets and investments and their transfer or sale exempted

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The right to a pension, annuity, retirement allowance, return of contributions, the pension, annuity, or retirement allowance itself, any optional benefit, or any other right accrued or accruing to any person under this chapter and the moneys in the various accounts created by this chapter are exempt from any state, county, or municipal tax, except as provided in Code Section 48-7-27; exempt from levy and sale, garnishment, attachment, or any other process whatsoever; and shall not be assignable except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter. The exemptions under this Code section shall extend to benefits accrued or accruing to any member of a local retirement system, whether such benefits are attributable to amounts paid by the retirement system to such local retirement system for the account and benefit of the member, or otherwise. (b) A resident of this state who receives a pension, annuity, or retirement allowance from a teachers’ retirement system of another state or political subdivision shall be entitled to the same exemptions with respect to such benefits as are set forth in subsection (a) of this Code section, provided that the law of such other state or political subdivision allows substantially the same treatment to a person residing there with respect to a pension, annuity, or retirement allowance received from the Teachers Retirement System of Georgia. (c) The tangible, intangible, real, personal, or mixed property investments or assets of this retirement system of whatever kind or nature and the earnings or proceeds derived from such investments or assets are declared to be public property and exempt from taxation by the state, or by any county, municipality, authority, or political subdivision of this state and exempt from levy and sale, garnishment, attachment, or any other process whatsoever. (d) The transfer or sale of tangible, real, personal, or mixed property investments or assets to or from this retirement system and the instruments of such transfer or sale shall be exempt from any tax on such sales, transfers, or instruments levied by the state or by any county, authority, municipality, or political subdivision of this state.

History

(Ga. L. 1943, p. 640, § 10; Ga. L. 1968, p. 543, § 2; Ga. L. 1973, p. 896, § 1; Ga. L. 1976, p. 647, § 1; Ga. L. 2000, p. 1449, § 3.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Retirement benefits assigned not subject to widow’s claim. - Retirement benefits of a decedent under the Teachers Retirement System are not subject to his widow’s

year’s-support claim when the decedent has made a valid designation of a different beneficiary. Kirksey v. Teachers Retirement Sys., 250 Ga. 884, 302 S.E.2d 101 (1983).

Atlanta hotel-motel excise tax is a tax on the person occupying a guest room, not on the ‘‘transfer’’ of the room, and O.C.G.A. §§ 47-2-332 and 47-3-28) give no tax exemption to ‘‘persons occupying a guest room.’’ Teachers Retirement Sys. v. City of Atlanta, 249 Ga. 196, 288 S.E.2d 200 (1982). Property held by the retirement systems is not held for the benefit of private citizens; it is held for the benefit of public employees for whom the General Assembly has created retirement systems. This includes properties which produce income, as cabins in state parks and the hotel facilities at the continuing education center at the University of Georgia. Teachers Retirement Sys. v. City of Atlanta, 249 Ga. 196, 288 S.E.2d 200 (1982). Benefits not property of bankruptcy estate. - Chapter 7 debtor’s interest in a Teachers Retirement System of Georgia annuity that the debtor received as a beneficiary was excluded from the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541(c)(2); the in-

terest was in a trust because the annuity funds were still under the administration of the state pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 47-3-20 et seq., and the trust incorporated a statutory anti-alienation provision under O.C.G.A. § 47-3-28(a) enforceable under O.C.G.A. § 53-12-28. Coleman v. Hainlen (In re Hainlen), 365 B.R. 288 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2007). Retirement benefits subject to state income tax. - Subjecting retirement benefits of retired teachers to state income taxation did not violate the constitutional prohibition against state laws impairing the obligation of contracts since the teachers had no vested right to an irrevocable exemption which was barred under Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. I. Parrish v. Employees’ Retirement Sys., 260 Ga. 613, 398 S.E.2d 353 (1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 353, 111 S. Ct. 2016, 114 L. Ed. 2d 103 (1991). Cited in Shell v. Teachers Ret. Sys. of Ga., 291 Ga. App. 571, 662 S.E.2d 345 (2008).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Teacher retirement allowances exempt from income tax. - Word ‘‘pension’’ denotes a gratuity, or a payment in recognition of, but not in payment for, services rendered, and a retirement is not a ‘‘pension,’’ but is rather payment for services per-

formed, and, hence, it is subject to the income tax unless specifically exempt, as are the funds paid as retirement allowances to teachers exempt under this statute. 1952-53 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 213 (see O.C.G.A. § 47-3-28).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 30 Am. Jur. 2d, Executions, § 167 et seq. 31 Am. Jur. 2d, Exemptions, § 94 et seq. C.J.S. - 33 C.J.S., Executions, § 42. 38 C.J.S., Garnishment, §§ 27 et seq., 92 et seq., 137. ALR. - Retirement or pension proceeds

or annuity payments under group insurance as subject to attachment or garnishment, 28 ALR2d 1213. Employee retirement pension benefits as exempt from garnishment, attachment, levy, execution, or similar proceedings, 93 ALR3d 711.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1983–2012 · leading case: Hammond v. Hammond, 722 S.E.2d 729 (Ga. 2012).
Hammond v. Hammond, 722 S.E.2d 729 (Ga. 2012). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 47-3-28. The parties stipulated that as of August 31, 2009, husband’s monthly retirement benefit, assuming a 50 percent survivor annuity, would be $3,238.”
Kirksey v. Teachers' Ret. Sys., 302 S.E.2d 101 (Ga. 1983). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 47-3-28(a) (Code Ann. § 32-2923) is what is referred to as an anti-attachment provision; and it states: “The right to a pension, annuity, retirement allowance, return of contributions, the pension, annuity, or retirement allowance itself, any optional benefit, or any…”
Coleman v. Hainlen (In Re Hainlen), 365 B.R. 288 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2007). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 47-3-28(a). This anti-alienation restriction applies to the rights “accrued or accruing to any person under this chapter” and its application is not limited to members; therefore the Court finds that a beneficiary, such as Debtor, is included in this anti-alienation…”
Shell v. Teachers Ret. Sys. of Georgia, 662 S.E.2d 345 (Ga. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “8 See OCGA § 47-3-28 (a). 9 See Bryant v. Employees Retirement System of Ga.”
— 47-3-28(a) — 2 cases
Kirksey v. Teachers' Ret. Sys., 302 S.E.2d 101 (Ga. 1983). “OCGA § 47-3-28(a) (Code Ann. § 32-2923) is what is referred to as an anti-attachment provision; and it states: “The right to a pension, annuity, retirement allowance, return of contributions, the pension, annuity, or retirement allowance itself, any optional benefit, or any…”
Coleman v. Hainlen (In Re Hainlen), 365 B.R. 288 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2007). “O.C.G.A. § 47-3-28(a). This anti-alienation restriction applies to the rights “accrued or accruing to any person under this chapter” and its application is not limited to members; therefore the Court finds that a beneficiary, such as Debtor, is included in this anti-alienation…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.