United Mutual Life Insurance Co., of Indianapolis v. State, ex rel. Attorney General
Decision Date | 28 June 1937 |
Docket Number | 4-4712 |
Citation | 108 S.W.2d 484,194 Ark. 371 |
Parties | UNITED MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF INDIANAPOLIS v. STATE, EX REL. ATTORNEY GENERAL |
Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court; Frank H. Dodge, Chancellor reversed.
Judgment reversed and cause dismissed.
House Moses & Holmes and H. B. Solmson, Jr., for appellant.
Jack Holt, Attorney General, Leffel Gentry, Assistant, and Paul X Williams, for appellee.
Appellant declined to pay a tax of 2 1/2 per cent. on certain gross premium receipts from 1931 to 1935, inclusive, for which the chancery court gave judgment in the sum of $ 5,566.30, with a direction that interest on such amount at six per cent. per annum should be computed and collected from December 1, 1936, to date of payment.
The state's claim is based upon § 9968 of Crawford & Moses' Digest, as amended by act 235 of 1935. Act 235 requires every life insurance company doing business in Arkansas to file with the insurance commissioner, at the time of making its annual report, a statement of gross premium receipts, upon which a tax of 2 1/2 per cent. is payable on or before March of each year.
Appellant's defense is that the laws of Arkansas exempt from the tax in question all fraternal beneficiary orders or societies, and such exemption may be claimed in answer to the state's suit, for the reason that the gross premium receipts which the State is undertaking to tax arose from payments made by members of appellant's predecessor, the Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias, a fraternal beneficiary society. Appellant admits that it is an old line legal reserve insurance company. The question to be determined, therefore, as stated in substance in appellee's brief, is this: Is a legal reserve mutual insurance company liable for taxes on premiums collected from policyholders in this state on business acquired from a fraternal beneficiary company when the fraternal beneficiary company is itself exempt from the payment of such taxes?
The issues were presented to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts, the essential parts of which follow:
The stipulations bring appellant's predecessor into this record as a fraternal beneficiary society belonging to a group or class which may claim exemption from payment of gross premium taxes. If The Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias had continued to transact its business here, exercising the fraternal or beneficiary characteristics pertaining to it at the time the certificates were issued, admittedly the gross premiums would not be taxable. But, acting under authority of Congress, appellant's predecessor separated its insurance activities from its fraternal functions, and insurance activities were assumed by the United Mutual Insurance Company. In April, 1931, this corporation was authorized to do business in Arkansas as an old line company. In 1932 congress passed an act permitting reincorporation, and in 1933 appellant did reincorporate under the laws of Indiana.
From April, 1931, the United Mutual Life Insurance Company (and the same company as reorganized in 1933 under the laws of Indiana) have been doing business in Arkansas under permits issued by the insurance commissioner, in pursuance of an agreement made by such commissioner, and concurred in by the attorney general. This agreement was an opinion, expressed in writing, that taxes on gross premiums on policies of insurance written subsequent to 1930 would be taxable, but that premiums on certificates issued by The Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias would be exempt--this on the theory that the fraternal, or lodge, or ritualistic features of the original contract, having once attached, were not altered by the fact that thereafter premium maturities would be payable to an old line company.
It is contended by appellant that the judgment should be reversed on authority of Modern Woodmen of America v State ex rel. Attorney General, 193 Ark. 458, 103 S.W.2d 38. We do not think that decision is conclusive of the issues now before us. No contention was there made that the appellant had by any formal act of reorganization or reincorporation changed its characteristics from those of a fraternal beneficiary society to those of an old line insurance company. On the contrary, it was shown that for many years the appellant had operated under the guise of a fraternal agency through permits annually renewed by the insurance commissioner. It was also shown that a lodge system of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Department of Public Utilities v. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co.
... ... J ... ... General Order No. 13 was issued by appellant on April 13, ... within the state, as defined in § 1 of act 324 of 1935, ... to ... the United States that the transportation of natural gas ... Missouri ex rel. Barrett v. Kansas Nat ... Gas Co., 265 ... ...
-
Highlanders v. Wiseman
... ... the department of trade and commerce (insurance) ... remains in full force until reversed by ... described as a mutual legal reserve life insurance company is ... its ... the state; nor can it be questioned on direct attack by ... North American Nat. Life Ins. Co". , 115 Neb. 801, 215 ... N.W. 167 ... \xC2" ... 509 ... The ... general rule appears to be that a court or officer may ... 1315, 275 N.W. 127; United Mutual Life Ins. Co. v ... State , 194 Ark ... ...
-
Security Benefit Life Ins. Co. v. McCarthy
...Neb. 28, 299 N.W. 459 (1941); Yeoman Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Murphy, 223 Iowa, 1315, 275 N.W. 127 (1937); United Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. State, 194 Ark. 371, 108 S.W.2d 484 (1937). Contra: Royal Highlanders v. Commissioner, 1 Tax Ct. 184 (Fed. 1942); Lutheran Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. State, ......
-
Security Ben. Life Ins. Co. v. Robinson
... ... ROBINSON, Supt. of Insurance, Appellee ... No. 35914 ... Supreme Court ... , organized and carried on solely for the mutual benefit of its members and their beneficiaries ... be exempt from all insurance laws of this state * * *,' is not thereafter applicable to such ... Kansas (Sections 40-721 through 40-725, General Statutes), amended its charter to transform the ... of Ohio and the Constitution of the United States to levy and collect this tax based upon a ... State ex rel. Attorney General, 1937, 193 Ark. 458, 103 S.W.2d ... Co. of ... Page 225 ... Indianapolis, Ind. v. State ex rel. Attorney General, 1937, ... ...