Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-7-201 (2026)

Tax authorized - Use and benefit - Allocation

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any county legislative body, by resolution, is authorized to levy a tax on all sand, gravel, sandstone, chert and limestone severed from the ground within its jurisdiction. The tax shall be levied for the use and benefit of the county only, to be allocated and applied to its county road fund, and all revenues collected from the tax, except deductions for administration and collection provided for in this part shall be allocated to the county.

(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), in any county having a population of not less than fourteen thousand nine hundred twenty-five (14,925) nor more than fourteen thousand nine hundred forty (14,940), according to the 1980 federal census or any subsequent federal census, the county legislative body may, by resolution adopted by a two-thirds (2/3) vote, allocate such revenues to the county road fund, the county general fund or any other fund of the county.

(c) Any county legislative body that has authorized a tax under this part is further authorized to repeal such tax by adopting a resolution by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of its members. The tax levied under this part shall cease to be imposed at one minute past midnight (12:01 a.m.) on the first day of the month following such action and the resolution shall include such date and time. The repeal of the tax shall have no effect on tax liabilities that occurred prior to the effective date of repeal, or collection actions on such taxes subsequent to the date of repeal. The presiding officer of the county legislative body shall deliver a certified copy of such resolution to the department of revenue.

Acts 1984, ch. 953, § 1; 1985, ch. 410, § 5; 1992, ch. 525, § 1; 1995, ch. 57, § 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1988–2016 · leading case: Nolichuckey Sand Co. v. Huddleston, 896 S.W.2d 782 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nolichuckey Sand Co. v. Huddleston, 896 S.W.2d 782 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 13× “(Nolichuckey), appeals and argues that the county option mineral severance tax (severance tax) codified at T.C.A. § 67-7-201, et seq., is constitutionally infirm in toto.”

Kentucky-Tennessee Clay Co. v. Huddleston, 922 S.W.2d 539 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 12× “First, Plaintiff asserted that the Act directly conflicts with T.C.A. § 67-7-201 et seq. and was, therefore, repealed by T.”

Menefee Crushed Stone Co. v. Taylor, 760 S.W.2d 223 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 6× “” The provisions of Chapter 953 were subsequently codified at Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 67-7-201 — 67-7-211. The Metropolitan Council of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, pursuant to Chapter 958, adopted Resolution 84-334 on August 21, 1984, and certified the…”

Kentucky-Tennessee Clay Co. v. Joe Huddleston, Comm'r of Revenue, State of Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 12× “First, Plaintiff asserted that the Act directly conflicts with T.C.A. § 67-7-201 et seq. and was, therefore, repealed by T.”

Decatur Cnty. v. Vulcan Materials (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 10× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-7-201 (a).1 In 1986, the legislative body of Plaintiff/Appellee Decatur County, the County Commission, discussed adopting a mineral severance tax, proposing to allocate the revenues to the county general fund rather than to the county road fund.”

Chuck's Package Store v. City of Morristown (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “find Decatur County distinguishable from the present case because the mineral severance tax imposed by counties is part of Title 67, specifically Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-7-201 , and it appears in the same statutory scheme with the statute abrogating the payment under protest…”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-7-201(b) — 1 case

Decatur Cnty. v. Vulcan Materials (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-7-201 (a).1 In 1986, the legislative body of Plaintiff/Appellee Decatur County, the County Commission, discussed adopting a mineral severance tax, proposing to allocate the revenues to the county general fund rather than to the county road fund.”

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.