Can anyone (county collector, county court, or circuit court) waive the late penalty when a property tax payment arrives postmarked after October 15?

Subject

Whether a county collector or court can waive Arkansas's delinquent property-tax penalty for payments mailed by October 15 but received and postmarked later.

Plain-English summary

Representative McGrew reported that constituents mailed property-tax payments on or before October 15, 2025, but USPS postmarked the envelopes in another city after that date. They were assessed delinquency penalties. He asked whether the county collector, county court, or circuit court could waive the penalty and whether a taxpayer could appeal it.

The Attorney General said A.C.A. § 26-36-201(b) directs the collector to assess and collect a ten percent penalty against delinquent taxpayers. Its use of “shall” makes that penalty mandatory; the collector has no discretion to waive or reduce it. For the same reason, the opinion answered no when asked whether a county court or circuit court could waive, cancel, or order the collector not to collect the penalty. The opinion also found no appeal procedure in § 26-36-201 or elsewhere in the Attorney General's research.

The opinion distinguishes the payment deadline from the way some collectors handle mailed payments. A strict reading of § 26-36-201(a)(1)(A) requires payment at the collector's office by October 15; that provision does not mention mailing or postmarks. The Attorney General preferred reading it alongside § 26-35-501(c)(3)(A), which permits the final installment to be mailed through USPS and requires a postmark by October 15. He observed that many collectors use that postmark date for all tax payments. Here, the payments were neither received nor postmarked by October 15.

An earlier opinion, 2015-149, concerned checks received on time and later lost by county staff. The Attorney General said it did not apply to payments that were not timely received or postmarked. He identified paying in person or requesting a manual USPS postmark when mailing as ways the constituents could have ensured timeliness. Footnote 8 also mentions USPS services involving proof of mailing; it does not say their receipts replace a required postmark.

What this means for you

If you are paying Arkansas property tax

This opinion treated payments that were neither received nor postmarked by October 15 as delinquent even though the taxpayers had mailed them by that date. It says a collector cannot waive the resulting statutory penalty. If mailing close to the deadline, the opinion identifies asking USPS for a manual postmark at the retail counter as one way to obtain a postmark dated when the mailpiece is tendered.

If you are a county collector

The Attorney General described the ten percent penalty as mandatory once the taxpayer is delinquent. The opinion acknowledges that many collectors accept payments with an October 15 USPS postmark as timely by reading two tax provisions together. It does not say § 26-36-201 itself establishes a universal postmark-only proof rule.

If you are evaluating a challenge to the penalty

The opinion found no statutory appeal procedure for this penalty in its research. It answered that neither county nor circuit court may waive the mandatory penalty. It did not lay out a filing or appeal path for a taxpayer to test an assessment.

Common questions

Q: Does § 26-36-201 say that a USPS postmark is the only proof of timely payment? A: No. The Attorney General says that section does not mention mailing or postmarks. He reads it with the separate installment-payment provision and reports that many collectors accept payments postmarked by October 15.

Q: Could the collector excuse a late postmark because I mailed by October 15? A: For the facts in this opinion, the payments were neither received nor postmarked by the deadline. The Attorney General concluded the collector had no discretion to waive or reduce the mandatory penalty.

Q: Did the Attorney General identify an appeal process?
A: No. The opinion says § 26-36-201 supplies no appeal procedure and that the Attorney General found no other method in his research.

Q: Why did Opinion 2015-149 not help these taxpayers?
A: That earlier matter involved checks timely received by county staff and later lost. These taxpayers' payments were not timely received or postmarked.

Q: Does a Certified Mail receipt itself satisfy the tax deadline? A: The opinion's footnote mentions Certificate of Mailing, Registered Mail, and Certified Mail as USPS proof-of-mailing services, but it does not decide whether any receipt substitutes for the postmark discussed in the text.

Background and statutory framework

A.C.A. § 26-36-201(a)(1)(A) sets the payment period for real-estate and personal-property taxes through October 15, and subsection (a)(2) makes taxes delinquent after that deadline. The opinion quotes subsection (b)'s ten percent penalty and cites State of Wash. v. Thompson for the mandatory meaning of “shall.” It reads those provisions alongside A.C.A. § 26-35-501(c)(3)(A), addressing the final mailed installment. The county and circuit court questions were answered from the penalty's mandatory wording, without an identified appeal route.

Citations and references

• A.C.A. § 26-36-201(a)(1)(A), (a)(2), and (b), opinion footnotes 1–2 and 6.
• A.C.A. § 26-35-501(c)(3)(A), opinion footnote 5.
• State of Wash. v. Thompson, 339 Ark. 417, 6 S.W.3d 82 (1999), opinion footnote 7.
• Ark. Att’y Gen. Op. 2015-149, discussed in the response to Question 2.

Source

• Landing page: https://arkansasag.gov/divisions/opinions-foia/attorney-general-opinions-search/

Original opinion text

TIM GRIFFIN
ATTORNEY GENERAL

Opinion No. 2025-122

February 20, 2026

The Honorable Richard McGrew
State Representative
324 Ouachita Avenue
Hot Springs, Arkansas 72901-5209

Dear Representative McGrew:

You report that several of your constituents were assessed delinquent tax penalties on property tax payments that were mailed on or before October 15, 2025, the deadline for payment. Instead of postmarking the payments on the date they were mailed, the United States Postal Service sent the payments to another city for postmarking. As a result, the payments received postmarks dated after October 15, 2025. You have asked the following questions:

1. Does a county collector have authority to waive, cancel, nullify, or otherwise not collect a
   delinquent tax penalty?

   Brief response: No. The county collector does not have discretion in assessing a penalty
   when taxpayers do not pay their personal property or real estate taxes by
   October 15 of each year.

2. Does Opinion No. 2015-149 have application in this instance, as the taxpayers did what
   was required to timely pay their taxes and were not directly at fault for the delinquency?

   Brief response: No. Opinion No. 2015-149 does not apply here.

3. Is there a procedure available under existing state law for a taxpayer to appeal a delinquent
   tax penalty? If so, what is that procedure?

   Brief response: The statute at issue, A.C.A. § 26-36-201, does not provide a procedure for
   a taxpayer to appeal a delinquent tax penalty. And I have found no other
   appeal method in my research.

4. Does a county court, as the court of original jurisdiction over county tax issues pursuant to
   Article 7, § 28 of the Arkansas Constitution and A.C.A. § 14-14-1105, have authority to
   waive, cancel, nullify, or otherwise order a collector to not collect a delinquent tax penalty?
   BOB R. BROOKS JR. JUSTICE BUILDING
   101 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE
   LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201

The Honorable Richard McGrew
State Representative
Opinion No. 2025-122
Page 2

Brief response: No. The penalty under A.C.A. § 26-36-201 is mandatory.

5. Does the circuit court, as the court of appellate jurisdiction from county court, and the court of equity, have authority to waive, cancel, nullify, or otherwise order a collector to not collect a delinquent tax penalty?

Brief response: No. The penalty under A.C.A. § 26-36-201 is mandatory.

DISCUSSION

Question 1: Does a county collector have authority to waive, cancel, nullify, or otherwise not collect a delinquent tax penalty?

No. The county collector does not have discretion in assessing a penalty when taxpayers do not pay their personal property or real estate taxes by October 15 of each year.

“[A]ll taxes levied on real estate and personal property for the county courts of this state … are due and payable at the county collector’s office between the first business day of March and October 15 inclusive.” 1 After the October 15 deadline, those taxes are delinquent. 2 A strict reading of A.C.A. § 26-36-201(a)(1)(A) is that the tax payments must be physically present “at the county collector’s office” by the deadline. 3 In fact, that statute does not reference postmarks or mailing of payments in any way.

But a better interpretation—and the one I believe many county collectors follow—is that A.C.A.
§ 26-36-201 should be read in conjunction with other tax laws regarding payments. 4 And under A.C.A. § 26-35-501(c)(3)(A), the final payment in an installment plan for real or personal property taxes can be mailed through the Postal Service. That payment must be mailed and postmarked by October 15 to be considered timely. 5 Thus, many county collectors accept all tax payments as timely so long as they are postmarked by October 15.

But after the deadline has passed, “the county collector shall extend [and collect] a penalty of ten percent (10%) against all delinquent taxpayers that have not paid their taxes within the time limit

1
A.C.A. § 26-36-201(a)(1)(A).
2
Id. § 26-36-201(a)(2).
3
Wickham v. State, 2009 Ark. 357, 5, 324 S.W.3d 344, 347 (2009) (internal citations omitted) (“[T]he first rule in considering the meaning and effect of a statute is to construe it just as it reads, giving the words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning in common language.”). 4 Metzner v. State, 2015 Ark. 222, 9, 462 S.W.3d 650, 656 (internal citations omitted) (“In construing any statute, we place it beside other statutes relevant to the subject matter in question and ascribe meaning and effect derived from the whole.”). 5 A.C.A. § 26-35-501(c)(3)(A).

The Honorable Richard McGrew
State Representative
Opinion No. 2025-122
Page 3

specified.” 6 Because the statute uses “shall,” the penalty is mandatory, and the tax collector has no discretion to waive or reduce the penalty. 7

Question 2: Does Opinion No. 2015-149 have application in this instance, as the taxpayers did what was required to timely pay their taxes and were not directly at fault for the delinquency?

No, Opinion No. 2015-149 does not apply here. That opinion concerned tax payments by check that were timely received but later lost by county staff. In that context, the taxpayers complied with all statutory requirements, and the error occurred after their payments were received—not just mailed. Since the taxpayers at issue received receipts, they most likely made their payments in person.

Here, by contrast, your constituents’ payments were not timely received or postmarked by October 15. While your constituents may not have anticipated that the payments would be postmarked after October 15, I cannot agree that they “did what was required to timely pay their taxes” and so “were not directly at fault for the delinquency.” They had several options to ensure their taxes were timely paid. For instance, your constituents could have paid their taxes in person. Or they could have asked the Postal Service staff for postmarks when they mailed their payments. 8

Question 3: Is there a procedure available under existing state law for a taxpayer to appeal a delinquent tax penalty? If so, what is that procedure?

The statute at issue, A.C.A. § 26-36-201, does not provide a procedure for a taxpayer to appeal a delinquent tax penalty. And I have found no other appeal method in my research.

Question 4: Does a county court, as the court of original jurisdiction over county tax issues pursuant to Article 7, § 28 of the Arkansas Constitution and A.C.A. § 14-14-1105, have authority to waive, cancel, nullify, or otherwise order a collector to not collect a delinquent tax penalty?

No. As discussed above, the penalty under A.C.A. § 26-36-201 is mandatory.

6
Id. § 26-36-201(b).
7
State of Wash. v. Thompson, 339 Ark. 417, 424–25, 6 S.W.3d 82, 86 (1999) (internal citations omitted) (“Under our principles of statutory construction, “shall” is mandatory.”). 8 USPS.com, https://about.usps.com/newsroom/statements/010226-postmarking-myths-and-facts.htm (last visited Feb. 20, 2026) (“[I]f a customer wants to ensure that their mailpiece receives a postmark, and that the date on the postmark aligns with the date of mailing, the customer may take the mailpiece to a Postal Service retail location and request a manual (local) postmark at the retail counter when tendering their mailpiece.”) (emphasis in original). The Postal Service also has other services that involve proof-of-mailing: Certificate of Mailing, Registered Mail, and Certified Mail. Id.

The Honorable Richard McGrew
State Representative
Opinion No. 2025-122
Page 4

Question 5: Does the circuit court, as the court of appellate jurisdiction from county court, and the court of equity, have authority to waive, cancel, nullify, or otherwise order a collector to not collect a delinquent tax penalty?

No. As discussed above, the penalty under A.C.A. § 26-36-201 is mandatory.

Assistant Attorney General Jodie Keener prepared this opinion, which I hereby approve.

Sincerely,

TIM GRIFFIN
Attorney General