When the NC legislature moved the DMV Enforcement Section from DOT to the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety in 2002, did it also move the special tax-information exception that let DMV exchange tax data with the Department of Revenue?

Plain-English summary

In 2002, the General Assembly passed Chapter 190 (HB 314), which moved the Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section out of the Department of Transportation and into the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, effective January 1, 2003. Along with the transfer came a long list of specifically amended statutes, all updated to substitute "Department of Crime Control and Public Safety" for "Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation."

But the legislature missed one. G.S. 105-259(b)(7) authorizes a narrow exception to the general rule that tax information must be kept confidential. The exception allows the Department of Revenue to exchange information "with the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation or the International Fuel Tax Association Inc., when the information is needed to fulfill a duty imposed on the Department of Revenue or the Division of Motor Vehicles." That tax-info exception specifically supports motor-fuels tax enforcement.

Sabra Faires, the Department of Revenue's Assistant Secretary for Tax Administration, asked the AG whether the omission meant the tax-info exception had quietly evaporated when the Enforcement Section moved to DCC. If so, sharing tax information with the moved Enforcement Section would expose Revenue employees to the severe G.S. 105-259(c) sanctions, including dismissal.

Chief Deputy AG Edwin Speas concluded the exception survives. Section 1 of Chapter 190 says the transferred DCC unit is a "continuation" of the prior DOT Enforcement Section, and explicitly provides:

Where the Department of Transportation, the Division of Motor Vehicles, or the Enforcement Section, or any combination thereof are referred to by law, contract, or other document, that reference shall apply to the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety.

That blanket "successor" clause is broad enough to pull G.S. 105-259(b)(7) along even though it wasn't on the specific-amendment list. As of January 1, 2003, the Revenue Department should administer the exception as if it reads "Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section of the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety" in place of the old "Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation."

The AG also drew a careful line on how to apply the successor clause. The blanket language is broad enough to be read as expanding the exception to cover all of DCC, not just the moved Enforcement Section. The AG rejected that reading. Chapter 190's purpose is to preserve the powers and duties of the Enforcement Section in a new home, not to give the rest of DCC new authority to receive tax information about everything it does. Citing State v. Blackstock (1985) for the canon that statutory words should be construed consistent with the statute's purpose, the AG narrowed the substitution: only the Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section now has the tax-info exchange privilege, not the entire Department of Crime Control and Public Safety.

The practical effect: motor-fuels tax cooperation between Revenue and the moved Enforcement Section can continue uninterrupted across the transfer date. Other parts of DCC do not gain new access to taxpayer information.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2002. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here. The North Carolina executive branch has been restructured multiple times since 2002; the Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section has subsequently moved again, and G.S. 105-259 has been amended significantly. Anyone considering tax-information sharing should consult current statutes and current agency placement.

Background and statutory framework

The tax-information confidentiality regime. G.S. 105-259(b) starts from a flat prohibition: state officers and employees may not disclose tax information to anyone outside the Department of Revenue. The General Assembly carved out narrow exceptions in subsections (b)(1) through (b)(many), each tied to a specific permitted purpose, like exchange with the IRS, judicial proceedings, or, here, motor-fuels enforcement. Violation triggers sanctions including dismissal, criminal penalties, and civil liability under § 105-259(c).

Why the omission mattered. Tax-confidentiality statutes are construed strictly. A government employee who shares tax data with an unauthorized recipient cannot defend by saying "the legislature obviously meant to keep authorizing this." So when the Enforcement Section moved offices, an unfixed cross-reference in (b)(7) could have created real risk for line-level Revenue employees.

The "successor in interest" pattern. NC and most jurisdictions use "successor-in-interest" clauses in reorganization statutes to avoid having to chase down every statutory cross-reference in the General Statutes when an agency moves. The pattern: enact (1) a list of specific section-by-section amendments for the most important touchpoints, and (2) a blanket clause sweeping up everything not specifically addressed. The AG had to decide how to interpret an apparent gap between those two.

Specific vs. blanket construction. The AG read the specific-amendment list and the blanket clause as complementary rather than as a negative implication. The legislature explicitly chose the most consequential statutes for line-by-line amendment, but expected the blanket clause to handle the rest. The fact that a particular cross-reference is not in the specific list does not mean it survived in its old form; it means the blanket clause does the work.

Narrowing back to original scope. The trickier part is rejecting an over-broad reading. If the Court of Appeals had to read Section 1 literally, every reference to DMV or DOT in laws and contracts would point to all of DCC, even when the specific subject was only the Enforcement Section's function. The AG narrowed this by linking the construction to Chapter 190's purpose: preserve, don't expand.

Common questions

Q: Could a Department of Revenue employee have been safely sharing tax info with the moved Enforcement Section after January 1, 2003, even before this opinion came out?

A: Probably yes, assuming the Revenue employee was confident about the legal analysis. But the practical safer course was to obtain written legal advice, which is exactly what Assistant Secretary Faires did. The AG's opinion provided documented cover for Revenue staff to continue the exchange without fear of § 105-259(c) sanctions.

Q: Could DCC use this opinion to seek tax information for non-motor-fuels law enforcement purposes?

A: No. The AG specifically rejected the broad reading. Only the Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section, in its motor-fuels enforcement capacity, inherits the tax-information exception. Other DCC units do not gain new authority to receive taxpayer information.

Q: What if the General Assembly later amends G.S. 105-259 directly?

A: The AG opinion would be superseded by the actual statutory text. The opinion exists to bridge a gap created by a drafting omission; an express legislative amendment cleaning up the cross-reference would moot the analysis.

Q: Does the same logic apply to other statutes the legislature missed during reorganizations?

A: Yes, where the reorganization statute contains a similar successor-in-interest blanket clause. NC reorganizations routinely include such clauses precisely to avoid leaving gaps. The construction the AG used here is generalizable: read the blanket clause to sweep up missed cross-references, but only to the extent the original scope was about the unit that actually moved.

Citations

Statutes and session laws:
- G.S. 105-259(b) (general tax-information confidentiality)
- G.S. 105-259(b)(7) (DMV motor-fuels enforcement exception)
- G.S. 105-259(c) (sanctions for unauthorized disclosure)
- Chapter 190 of the 2002 Session Laws (HB 314)
- SL 2002-190, Sec. 1 (successor-in-interest clause)
- SL 2002-190, Sec. 2 (specific-amendment list)
- SL 2002-159, Sec. 31.5 (effective date)

Cases:
- State v. Blackstock, 314 N.C. 232, 333 S.E.2d 245 (1985) (statutory words construed consistent with statute's purpose)

Source

• Landing page: https://ncdoj.gov/opinions/access-of-the-department-of-crime-control-and-public-safety-to-tax-information/

Original opinion text

REPLY TO: Edwin M. Speas, Jr.

(919) 716-6400 FAX: (919) 716-0135

November 18, 2002

Sabra J. Faires
Assistant Secretary for Tax Administration
Department of Revenue
Revenue Building
Raleigh, North Carolina

Re: Advisory Opinion; G.S. 105-259(b); SL 2002-190; Access of the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety to tax information

Dear Ms. Faires:

Chapter 190 of the 2002 Session Laws (HB 314) transfers the Division of Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section from the Department of Transportation to the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety. That transfer is effective January 1, 2003. SL 2002-159, Sec. 31.5. As a part of this transfer the General Assembly specifically amended a series of statutes to substitute the term "Department of Crime Control and Public Safety" for the term "Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation" and for closely related terms. SL 2002-190, Sec. 2. G.S. 105-259(b)(7) is not included in this series of statutes. That statute establishes a limited exception from the general prohibition against the disclosure of tax information for the "exchange of information with the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation or the International Fuel Tax Association Inc., when the information is needed to fulfill a duty imposed on the Department of Revenue or the Division of Motor Vehicles." Officers or employees of the State who violate the prohibition against the disclosure of tax information are subject to significant sanctions including dismissal from employment. G.S. 105-259(c).

The failure of the General Assembly to include G.S. 105-259(b)(7) in the series of specific statutes for which the term "Department of Crime Control and Public Safety" has been substituted for the term "Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Transportation," together with the significant penalties prescribed for the unauthorized disclosure of tax information, has prompted you to seek our opinion about whether G.S. 105-259(b)(7) remains a viable exception to the general prohibition against disclosure of tax information.

We are satisfied that the General Assembly intended that G.S. 105-259(b)(7) should remain a viable exception to the general prohibition against disclosure of tax information and that the failure of the General Assembly to list G.S. 105-259 (b)(7) in the series of specifically amended statutes has no legal significance. Section 1 of Chapter 190 of the 2002 Session provides in pertinent part as follows:

The Department of Crime Control and Public Safety shall be considered a continuation of the transferred portion of the Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section, for the purpose of succession to all rights, powers, duties, and obligations of the Enforcement Section and of those rights, powers, duties, and obligations exercised by the Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles on behalf of the Enforcement Section. Where the Department of Transportation, the Division of Motor Vehicles, or the Enforcement Section, or any combination thereof are referred to by law, contract, or other document, that reference shall apply to the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety.

The import of these words in light of the purpose of Chapter 190 seems clear: they reflect a legislative direction generally to substitute all statutory references that place the DMV Enforcement Section in the Department of Transportation with references that place that Section in the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety. Consistent with this legislative direction it is our opinion that effective January 1, 2003, the Department of Revenue should administer G.S. 105-259(b)(7) as if it reads: "To exchange information with Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section of the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety or the International Fuel Tax Association Inc. when the information is needed to fulfill a duty imposed on the Department of Revenue or the Motor Vehicles Enforcement Section of the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety." Administration of this statute in this manner should protect Department of Revenue employees from the severe penalties prescribed for the unauthorized release of tax information.

We recognize that the words of Section 1 are broad enough to allow G.S. 105-259(b)(7) to be read as follows: "To exchange information with the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety or the International Fuel Tax Association, Inc. when the information is needed to fulfill a duty imposed on the Department of Revenue or the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety." That reading, however, would expand the scope of the exception in G.S. 105-259(b)(7) beyond its present boundaries — from sharing information regarding the enforcement of the motor fuels taxes to sharing information regarding the many law enforcement duties of the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety. Because the central purpose of Chapter 190 is to place the Enforcement Section in the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety and to continue and preserve its powers and duties in that context, and not to broaden them, we would recommend against that expansive reading. See e.g. State v. Blackstock, 314 N.C. 232, 333 S.E.2d 245 (1985) (words of a statute should be construed consistent with its purpose).

We trust that our views will be of assistance to the Department of Revenue and the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety.

Very truly yours,

Edwin M. Speas, Jr.

Chief Deputy Attorney General

EMSjr/sf

cc: Secretary Beatty