Weiser National Bank v. Jeffreys

• Citation: 95 P. 23,14 Idaho 659
• Parties: WEISER NATIONAL BANK, a Corporation, Appellant, v. WOODSON JEFFREYS, Treasurer, et al., Respondents
• Decision Date: 27 March 1908
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

95 P. 23

14 Idaho 659

WEISER NATIONAL BANK, a Corporation, Appellant, v. WOODSON JEFFREYS, Treasurer, et al., Respondents

Supreme Court of Idaho

March 27, 1908

NATIONAL BANKS-LIMIT OF STATE TAXATION-OF CAPITAL STOCK-OF SHARES OF STOCK-ASSESSMENT TO BANK-ASSESSMENT OF SHARES-TO SHARE OWNERS-VOID ASSESSMENT-LIST OF BANK PROPERTY MADE BY CASHIER-ESTOPPEL OF BANK-POWER OF BOARD OF EQUALIZATION.

1. The only power the state has to levy any taxation, either direct or indirect, upon national banks, their property, assets or franchises, is that granted by the laws of the United States.

2. Sec 5219, Rev. Stat., of the United States, is the measure of the power of a state to tax national banks, their property or their franchises.

3. Any tax on the property of a national bank that is in excess of and not in conformity to the provisions of said section of the Revised Statutes of the United States is void.

4. The term, "capital stock," does not mean "shares of capital stock," as used in our revenue law, but means the actual money or property paid in and possessed by the corporation.

5. There is no authority under the statutes of the United States nor under the revenue laws of this state which authorizes the taxation of the capital stock of national banks.

6. The county assessor has no authority to assess the "capital stock" of a national bank, but is given authority to assess the shares of stock of such bank to the owners thereof.

7. Under the provisions of sec. 12, art. 7, of the state constitution, the county commissioners for the several counties of the state constitute the boards of equalization for their respective counties, whose duty it is to equalize the valuation of the taxable property in their respective counties under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by law.

8. Under the provisions of secs. 54 and 55 of the revenue act of this state, approved March 12, 1901 (Sess. Laws 1901, p 233), the method and manner of equalizing the valuation of the taxable property in the several counties of the state is provided for, and applies to the taxable property in the county, and not to property over which the taxing power has no jurisdiction.

9. Under the provisions of said revenue act, the assessor is authorized to assess the shares of stock of national banks to the in- dividual owners thereof, and is prohibited from assessing the capital stock of such bank.

10. The cashier of such bank may act as the agent of the bank in listing its property for taxation, but he has no authority to list the capital stock of such bank for assessment against the bank, and the mistake of the cashier in listing the capital stock of the bank for taxation will not estop the bank from recovering the taxes paid under protest on such void assessment.

11. Inland Lumber & Timber Co. v. Thompson, 11 Idaho 508, 114 Am.St.Rep. 274, 83 P. 933, cited and distinguished.

(Syllabus by the court.)

APPEAL from the District Court of Seventh Judicial District for Washington County. Hon. Ed. L. Bryan, Judge.

Action to recover taxes paid under protest on a void assessment. Judgment for the defendants. Reversed.

Reversed and remanded. Costs of this appeal awarded to the appellant.

Ed. R Coulter, for Appellant.

"An assessment made within the time and in the manner prescribed by the statute is indispensable in proceedings to enforce the collection of taxes." (Cooley on Taxation, 3d ed., 597; Shoup v. Willis, 2 Idaho 120, 6 P. 124; St. Louis I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Miller, 67 Ark. 498, 55 S.W. 926; sec. 43, Revenue Act of Idaho, Sess. Laws, 1901, p. 249; sec. 5219, U. S. Rev. Stat. [U. S. Comp. Stat. 3502].)

States have no jurisdiction to tax the agencies of the federal government except as the federal government grants the right to the state so to do. (Cooley on Taxation, 3d ed., 129.) "An assessment made without jurisdiction is void." (Cooley on Tax., 3d ed., 1390; Owensboro Nat. Bank v. Owensboro, 173 U.S. 664, 19 S.Ct. 537, 43 L.Ed. 850; Collins v. Chicago, F. Cas. No. 3011, 4 Biss. 472; First Nat. Bank v. Richmond, 39 F. 309; National Bank v. Richmond, 42 F. 877; Boston v. Beal, 51 F. 306; Smith v. First Nat. Bank, 17 Mich. 479; National Bank of Mobile v. Mobile, 62 Ala. 284, 34 Am. Rep. 15; Farmers' etc. Bank v. Hoffman, 93 Iowa 119, 61 N.W. 418.)

"The shares of a national bank cannot be listed and valued in the aggregate, and as such aggregate placed on the tax list in the bank's name. Such shares when listed and valued for taxation are required to be placed on the proper tax list in the names of the respective owners." (Miller v. First Nat. Bank, 46 Ohio St. 424, 21 N.E. 860; Springfield v. Springfield Bank, 87 Mo. 441.)

"Where an assessment is utterly void, on the ground that the assessor did not have jurisdiction to impose the same, an action may be maintained to recover back money paid under protest, in satisfaction thereof, without first having the assessment set aside or vacated." (Bruecher v. Village of Port Chester, 101 N.Y. 240, 4 N.E. 272; Mechanics' Sav. Bank v. Granger, 17 R. I. 77, 20 A. 202.)

"Capital stock" and "shares of capital stock" are two distinct things, separably taxable. "Capital stock" as used in the tax law does not mean "shares of stock," but means the actual money or property paid in and possessed by the corporation. (State Bank of Virginia v. City of Richmond, 79 Va. 113; People v. feitner, 92 A.D. 518, 87 N.Y.S. 304, and authorities therein cited.)

"The taxpayer is not estopped by his return when the assessment is void." (Wilmington v. Ricaud, 90 F. 214, 32 C. C. A. 580; Phelps v. Thurston, 47 Conn. 477; Comm. v. Hamilton, 24 Ky. Law Rep. 1944, 72 S.W. 744; Charlestown v. Middlesex County, 109 Mass. 270; State v. Burrough, 174 Mo. 700, 74 S.W. 610; Chicago etc. Ry. Co. v. Cass Co., 51 Neb. 369, 70 N.W. 955; Sommer v. Boyd, 48 Ohio St. 648, 29 N.E. 497; Centennial Eureka Min. Co. v. Juab County, 22 Utah 395, 62 P. 1024; Louisville v. Anderson, 79 Ky. 334, 42 Am. Rep. 220; Central P. Ry. Co. v. California, 162 U.S. 91, 16 S.Ct. 766, 40 L.Ed. 903; Milford Water Co. v. Town of Hopkinton, 102 Mass. 491, 78 N.E. 451.)

Frank Harris, for Respondents.

"When provision is made for an application to a board of equalization or review for the correction of errors in an assessment, such remedy is exclusive, and a taxpayer failing to avail himself thereof within the time prescribed cannot prevent the collection of a tax for any cause for which he might have had an abatement." (25 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 1st ed., 242, and cases therein cited; Stanley v. Board of Supervisors, 121 U.S. 535, 7 S.Ct. 1234, 30 L.Ed. 1004; Northern P. Ry. Co. v. Patterson, 10 Mont. 90, 24 P. 704; First Nat. Bank v. Bailey, 15 Mont. 301, 39 P. 83; Inland Lumber etc. Co. v. Thompson, 11 Idaho 508, 114 Am. St. Rep. 274, 83 P. 933; Williams v. Holden, 4 Wend. 223; 45 Cent. Dig. 1121, sec. 809.)

SULLIVAN, J. Ailshie, C. J., and Stewart, J., concur.

OPINION

SULLIVAN, J.

This action was brought by the Weiser National Bank, a corporation, as plaintiff, against Woodson Jeffreys, treasurer of Washington county, and Washington county, as defendants, to recover a tax of $ 636 paid under protest. The case was submitted to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts, and judgment was entered against the plaintiff, who is appellant here, dismissing the action.

The facts stipulated were in effect as follows: That the Weiser National Bank is a banking corporation organized under the laws of the United States of America relating to national banks; that its principal office and place of business is at the city of Weiser in Washington county, and that it began doing business on March 15, 1906; that said bank was organized with a paid-up capital of $ 50,000, consisting of 500 shares of capital stock of the par value of $ 100 each that a list of the stockholders and owners of the shares of capital stock of said corporation is attached to the stipulated facts as an "exhibit"; that said list contains a true statement of the names of the stockholders and their residences at the time of the organization of said bank, as well as at the date of the attempted assessment of the capital stock of said bank by the county assessor and tax collector of said Washington county for the year 1906; that all of the money with which said shares of stock were purchased, except the sum of $ 4,000, with which $ 4,000 were purchased two shares of Rebecca K. Troy of Cincinnati, Ohio; two shares of Samuel R. Meyer of Cincinnati, Ohio; two shares of Sig Wise of Cincinnati, Ohio, and thirty shares of M. McGregor of Portland, Oregon, was in the state of Idaho on the second Monday of January, 1906; that from the second Monday of January, 1905, until the second Monday in January, 1907, Francis M. Potter was the duly qualified and acting assessor and ex-officio tax collector of said county; that from the second Monday in January, 1907, until the second Monday in January, 1907, J. M. Canary was the duly elected, qualified and acting treasurer of said county; that since the second Monday of January, 1907, defendant Woodson Jeffreys has been and now is the duly qualified and acting treasurer of said county, being the successor of said Canary; that on or about the month of May, 1906, said Potter, in his official capacity of assessor of said Washington county, did attempt to assess all the property of plaintiff corporation it then owned for taxation for the year 1906, regardless of the fact that the plaintiff corporation was not in existence on the second Monday of January, 1906, and in pursuance of said assessment, said assessor did, on tax list numbered 313 for said year, attempt to assess the following described property for the purpose of taxation for the year 1906, to wit:...