Adams Motor Co. v. Cler

• Decision Date: 13 February 1920
• Docket Number: 1515.
• Citation: 102 S.E. 440,149 Ga. 818
• Parties: ADAMS MOTOR CO. ET AL. v. CLER, TAX COLLECTOR, ET AL.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

102 S.E. 440

149 Ga. 818

ADAMS MOTOR CO. ET AL. v. CLER, TAX COLLECTOR, ET AL.

No. 1515.

Supreme Court of Georgia

February 13, 1920

Syllabus by the Court.

Subsection 12 of section 2 of the General Tax Act passed by the General Assembly of Georgia in the year 1918 (Acts 1918, pp. 43-83) is not unconstitutional and invalid because the classification of the dealers in automobiles there made was arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable.

There is no merit in the contention that the classification was arbitrary, discriminatory, and unreasonable because of the provision permitting any person who has paid the tax to resell any automobile or vehicle taken in exchange for an automobile without the payment of an additional tax.

Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

A tax upon business is not a tax upon "property," within the meaning of the ad valorem and uniformity clause (Const art. 7, § 2 [Civ. Code 1910, § 6553]).

Error from Superior Court, Chatham County; P. W. Mildrim, Judge.

Suit by the Adams Motor Company and others against Fred Cler, Tax Collector, and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

Osborne Lawrence & Abrahams, of Savannah, for plaintiffs in error.

Geo. W. Owens, of Savannah, for defendants in error.

BECK, P.J. (after stating the facts as above).

1. The section of the General Tax Act passed by the General Assembly of Georgia in the year 1918 which the plaintiffs contend is invalid because it violates certain provisions of the state and federal Constitutions is in the following language:

"12th. Automobiles. Upon every agent of, and upon every dealer in, and upon every person soliciting orders for the sales of automobiles, the sum set out below, viz.: In each county for each make of such vehicle only one such tax for such make for each agency to be taxed in any one county. Any agency having paid such tax to be allowed any number of employés within the county wherein such tax has been paid, free from such liabilities. Provided, that any person, firm or corporation paying this tax shall be permitted to resell any automobile or other vehicle taken in exchange for automobiles without the payment of additional tax. In each county with a population of less than 20,000, $27.50. In each county with a population of between 20,000 and 30,000, $55.00. In each county with a population of between 30,000 and 50,000, $82.50. In each county with a population between 50,000 and 75,000, $110.00. In each county with a population of between 75,000 and 100,000, $165.00. In each county with a population of between 100,000 and 150,000, $220.00. In each county with a population exceeding 150,000, $275.00."

The soundness of the criticisms upon this act depends upon whether the section in question makes an arbitrary and unreasonable classification of dealers in automobiles subject to the tax imposed by this section. After careful consideration of the subject of this inquiry it does not seem to us that the Legislature, in exercising its right to make a classification for the purpose of imposing a tax like that in question, has acted arbitrarily and unreasonably. It is settled law that a tax upon a business is not a tax upon property, within the meaning of the ad valorem and uniformity clauses of the Constitution, and it is not a valid objection that another business or object is not taxed, or is taxed a different amount. The requirement of this kind of classification is that it shall be uniform upon all business of the same class. Weaver v. State, 89 Ga. 639, 15 S.E. 840, and cases...