CopyCited 12 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 16, 1998 | 496 S.E.2d 727, 98 Fulton County D. Rep. 893
...S97A2089 and the cross-appellee in Case No. S97X2092, brought this action against the Revenue Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Revenue (T. Jerry Jackson), and the Tax Commissioner of Cobb County, Georgia (Jim McDuffie), contending that OCGA §
48-5-472 (b), as amended in 1995 and 1997,1 creates an exemption from ad *203valorem taxation for dealer-owned motor vehicles that are held for sale or resale; that, contrary to the commissioners’ contention, the exemption was not authorized by Art....
...llenge. For the reasons that follow, we rule that Lowry has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, but that his constitutional challenge lacks merit.
1. The question whether Lowry has standing to attack the constitutionality of §
48-5-472 (b) has been decided favorably to Lowry by this Court in Wasden v....
...1805 declaring otherwise is void on its face. Was-den may attack such judgment because it is material to his interest to have it vacated.3
The same reasoning is applicable to the present case, and leads to the conclusion that Lowry has standing to challenge the constitutionality of §
48-5-472 (b)....
...ged void and illegal tax digest[ ]”;5 and that a taxpayer has standing to seek to enjoin public officials from committing ultra vires acts.6
2. Having determined that Lowry has standing, we next address whether the trial court properly ruled that §
48-5-472 (b) exempts dealer-owned motor vehicles from ad valorem taxation....
...f the language of a statute “ ‘is plain and susceptible of but one natural and reasonable construction, the court has no authority to place a different construction upon it, but must construe it according to its terms.’ ”8
Subsection (b) of §
48-5-472 provides that “motor vehicles which are owned by a dealer and held in inventory for sale or resale ....
...d on such motor vehicles until they are transferred and then become subject to taxation.” Black’s Law Dictionary defines the word “exempt” as follows: “To relieve certain classes of property . . . from taxation.”9 Because the language of §
48-5-472 (b) relieves a certain class of property — dealer-owned motor vehicles held for sale or resale — from taxation, we can only conclude that the statute plainly, not impliedly, grants an exemption from ad valorem taxation for such dealer-owned vehicles.
3....
...Art. VII, Sec. II, Par. II (a) (1) of the Constitution.
In this case, Lowry contends that the trial court erred in construing Par. Ill (b) (3) of the Constitution to authorize the General Assembly to create the ad valorem tax exemption codified at §
48-5-472 (b) (2).10 If Lowry is correct in this contention, then he is likewise correct that the exemption is unconstitutional since Par....
...Ill (b) (3) of the Constitution is the only possible constitutional authority for enacting the exemption.
In this regard, Lowry urges that Par. Ill (b) (3) of the Georgia Constitution should not be construed to authorize the legislature to create the exemption granted by §
48-5-472 (b) (2) since Par....
...S97A2089 and S97X2092.
Ben-ham, C. J, Fletcher, P. J., Sears, Hunstein, Thompson, JJ, and Judge Paschal A. English, Jr., concur. Carley, J., concurs specially. Hines, J., not participating.
See Ga. L. 1995, p. 809, § 18; Ga. L. 1997, p. 419, § 36. Following its 1997 amendment, §
48-5-472 (b) provides as follows:
Motor vehicles which are owned by a dealer and held in inventory for sale or resale shall constitute a separate subclassification of motor vehicles within the motor vehicle classification of tangible property for...
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 16, 1998 | 269 Ga. 202
...S97A2089 and the cross-appellee in Case No. S97X2092, brought this action against the Revenue Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Revenue (T. Jerry *729 Jackson), and the Tax Commissioner of Cobb County, Georgia (Jim McDuffie), contending that OCGA §
48-5-472(b), as amended in 1995 and 1997, [1] creates an exemption from ad valorem taxation for dealer-owned motor vehicles that are held for sale or resale; that, contrary to the commissioners' contention, the exemption was not authorized by Art....
...allenge. For the reasons that follow, we rule that Lowry has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, but that his constitutional challenge lacks merit. 1. The question whether Lowry has standing to attack the constitutionality of §
48-5-472(b) has been decided favorably to Lowry by this Court in Wasden v....
...face. Wasden may attack such judgment because it is material to his interest to have it vacated. [3] The same reasoning is applicable to the present case, and leads to the conclusion that Lowry has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the §
48-5-472(b)....
...ed void and illegal tax digests;" [5] and that a taxpayer has standing to seek to enjoin public officials from committing ultra vires acts. [6] 2. Having determined that Lowry has standing, we next address whether the trial court properly ruled that §
48-5-472(b) exempts dealer-owned motor vehicles from ad *730 valorem taxation....
...hand, if the language of a statute "`is plain and susceptible of but one natural and reasonable construction, the court has no authority to place a different construction upon it, but must construe it according to its terms.'" [8] Subsection (b) of §
48-5-472 provides that "motor vehicles which are owned by a dealer and held in inventory for sale or resale......
...be collected on such motor vehicles until they are transferred and then become subject to taxation." Black's Law Dictionary defines the word "exempt" as follows: "To relieve certain classes of property ... from taxation." [9] Because the language of §
48-5-472(b) relieves a certain class of property dealer-owned motor vehicles held for sale or resalefrom taxation, we can only conclude that the statute plainly, not impliedly, grants an exemption from ad valorem taxation for such dealer-owned vehicles....
...pecified Art. 7, Sec. 2., Para. 2(a)(1) of the Constitution. In this case, Lowry contends that the trial court erred in construing Para. 3(b)(3) of the Constitution to authorize the General Assembly to create the ad valorem tax exemption codified at §
48-5-472(b)(2)....
...3(b)(3) of the Constitution is the only possible constitutional authority for enacting the exemption. In this regard, Lowry urges that Paragraph 3(b)(3) of the Georgia Constitution should not be construed to authorize the legislature to create the exemption granted by §
48-5-472(b)(2) since Paragraph 3(b)(3) does not use the words "exempt" or "exemption," and since, according to Lowry, to so construe Paragraph 3(b)(3) would place it in conflict with Art....
...*732 BENHAM, C.J., FLETCHER, P.J., SEARS, HUNSTEIN, and THOMPSON, JJ., and Judge PASCHAL A. ENGLISH, Jr., concur. CARLEY, J., concurs specially. HINES, J., not participating. NOTES [1] See Ga. Laws 1995, p. 809, § 18; Ga. Laws 1997, p. 419, § 36. Following its 1997 amendment, §
48-5-472(b) provides as follows: Motor vehicles which are owned by a dealer and held in inventory for sale or resale shall constitute a separate subclassification of motor vehicles within the motor vehicle classification of tangible property for ad valorem taxation purposes....
