When could a Texas county begin collecting the optional $5 vehicle registration fee authorized to start in 1985?

Texas AG Opinion JM-281: County Vehicle Registration Fee

Plain-English summary

Travis County asked when it could begin charging an optional $5 county vehicle registration fee under article 6675a-9a. The statute allowed the fee to take effect only on January 1 of a year ending in 5 or 0, while the enacting legislation applied it to a registration period beginning on or after its effective date. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

The Attorney General concluded that a county which had properly adopted the fee could begin charging it only on January 1, 1985. The fee applied to renewals that became eligible on or after that date, which meant registrations expiring February 28, 1985. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

The opinion rejected collecting the fee on renewals purchased before January 1, even if the renewed registration would expire after December 31. It relied on the rule that fee statutes were strictly construed against fees created by implication and on the ordinary meaning of “take effect.” Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

The opinion also accepted the highway department's established two-month renewal window: the expiration month and the month immediately preceding it. Reading “registration period” as the renewal period avoided charging different amounts for the same expiration group based only on whether the owner renewed before or after January 1. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1984. 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.

Common questions

When could the county first collect the optional $5 fee?

January 1, 1985. JM-281 read the words “take effect” to mean that the fee became operative on that date and could not be collected earlier. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Which registration renewals were first subject to the fee?

Renewals for registrations expiring February 28, 1985. Under the administrative practice described in the opinion, those registrations became eligible for renewal on January 1. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Could the county charge the fee in December for a registration that expired after December 31?

No. The opinion concluded that the fee could be charged only on or after January 1, 1985, even when a registration was already eligible for early renewal during December. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Why did the opinion treat the registration period as the renewal window?

That reading prevented an anomalous result in which owners with the same January 31 expiration date could pay different amounts depending on whether they renewed before or after January 1. It also matched the highway department's established administration of the renewal statutes. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

How long was the renewal window described in JM-281?

The opinion accepted a two-month period consisting of the month in which the registration expired and the immediately preceding month. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Background and statutory framework

Article 6675a-9a allowed a county to impose the optional fee only to take effect beginning January 1 of a year ending in 5 or 0. Section 3 of House Bill No. 965 stated that the fee applied to a registration period beginning on or after the date the fee took effect. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Texas had replaced a uniform April-through-March registration year with year-round vehicle registration. Article 6675a-3e, section 5, allowed plates to be purchased during the month preceding expiration, and the highway department's manual described a two-month renewal period that included both the expiration month and the preceding month. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

JM-281 gave substantial weight to the interpretation of the agency charged with administering the vehicle-registration statutes, while holding that administrative practice could not overcome the statutory phrase “take effect.” Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Citations and references

• Article 6675a-9a, V.T.C.S.
• Section 3 of House Bill No. 965, Acts 1983, 68th Legislature, chapter 922, at 4710
• Articles 6675a-1 et seq., 6675a-3e, section 5, and 6675a-4(a)
• Article 10, V.T.C.S.
• Moore v. Sheppard, 192 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1946)
• McLennan County v. Boggess, 137 S.W. 346 (Tex. 1911)
• Ex Parte Roloff, 510 S.W.2d 913 (Tex. 1974)
• Jones v. Del Andersen and Associates, 539 S.W.2d 348 (Tex. 1976)

Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/jim-mattox/jm-0281
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0281.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain. The linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas

December 20, 1984

Honorable Margaret Moore
Travis County Attorney
P. O. Box 1748
Austin, Texas 78767

Opinion No. JM-281

Re: When a county may charge the optional $5.00 vehicle registration fee

Dear Ms. Moore:

You have asked us to construe article 6675a-9a, V.T.C.S., with regard to the time in which the optional county vehicle registration fee may be imposed. The statutory language about which you inquire reads as follows:

(b) A county may impose a fee under this section only to take effect beginning January 1 of a year ending in a “5” or a “0”. (Emphasis added).

Section 3 of the same act, House Bill No. 965, whose first section added article 6675a-9a, provides that

A fee imposed by a county under Section 9a . . . applies to a registration period that begins on or after the date the fee takes effect. (Emphasis added).

Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 922, at 4710. Essentially, you ask when it is appropriate for a county to begin charging the extra $5.00 fee. We conclude that a county whose commissioners court has adopted the optional county vehicle registration fee in compliance with article 6675a-9a may begin charging such fee only on January 1, 1985 and only with regard to vehicles which, under the established administrative construction, become eligible for registration renewal on that date or thereafter.

The uncertainty which has led to your inquiry appears to have been engendered because article 6675a-9a has been imbedded in a statutory scheme of year-round vehicle registration, which replaced a system that for fifty years contained a uniform annual registration running from April 1 to March 31. Art. 6675a-1 et seq. You have suggested that either the extra $5.00 fee should be assessed only on all registration renewals purchased on or after January 1, 1985, or that the extra $5.00 fee should be assessed on all registrations expiring on or after December 31, 1984, even if the renewal is purchased during the two months prior to January 1, 1985. However, the well-established rule of law that statutes which fix fees are to be strictly construed against allowing a fee by implication militates against your suggested conclusion. Moore v. Sheppard, 192 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1946); McLennan County v. Boggess, 137 S.W. 346 (Tex. 1911).

Your second suggested analysis, that the optional fee is meant to apply to all registrations expiring on or after December 31, 1984, is based on the two-month time period during which you believe a renewal may be purchased prior to its expiration. Section 5 of article 6675a-3e provides that:

license plates may be purchased during the month preceding the date on which the registration expires.

Article 6675a-4(a) provides that:

Each registration year . . . shall . . . expire on the last day of the last calendar month in a registration period.

As an original matter, we might conclude that the “month” referred to in article 6675a-3e, section 5, was only the calendar month, 55 Tex. Jur. 2d Time 13 (1964), preceding the close of business on the last day of the month in which the registration expired. However, we agree with you that there is sufficient ambiguity that it is reasonable to reach the conclusion that the time period during which a renewal may be purchased is the two months preceding the date on which the registration expires.

Indeed, that is the conclusion arrived at by the Texas Department of Highways, as demonstrated by the testimony of Mr. Robert Townsly, Director of Motor Vehicle Division of the Texas Highway Department, at a hearing before the House Transportation Committee wherein he indicated that renewal notices would be sent out in the “month preceding the month in which the registration is due.” Bill Analysis to House Bill No. 1924, 64th Leg., Legislative Reference Library (1975). Likewise, the current manual issued to county tax assessor-collectors by the Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation refers to

a two-month registration renewal period, the month in which the current registration expires and the month immediately preceding the expiration month.

State of Texas Laws and Regulations Relating to the Registration of Vehicles Sec. 3.(b) II (1982). See also id., 23 et seq. While the interpretations of statutes made by agencies charged with their administration are not conclusive, they should be given substantial weight. Ex Parte Roloff, 510 S.W.2d 913 (Tex. 1974). Nevertheless, administrative construction cannot vitiate the plain meaning of the words “take effect” in section (b) of article 6675a-9a. Article 10, V.T.C.S., requires that words routinely be given their “ordinary signification.” See Jones v. Del Andersen and Associates, 539 S.W.2d 348 (Tex. 1976). Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines the term “take effect” as “to become operative.” Therefore, the optional fee may be charged only on and after January 1, 1985.

Your first suggested analysis of the timing of the implementation of the optional fee accepts this conclusion, but results in a strained application of your construction of the phrase “registration period” in article 6675a-4 to section 3 in House Bill No. 965. Therein “registration period” appears to mean the span of time of not more than twelve months for which a registration is valid. Its usage in that provision seems to be the product of the fact that the Texas Department of Highways was authorized to establish different registration years for different classifications of vehicles and to prorate annual registration fees on a monthly basis. If the phrase “registration period” means the same thing in article 6675a-4 as in section 3 of House Bill No. 965, it produces the following anomalous results: (1) for the first such registration “period” to begin on or after January 1, 1985, the two-month period for the renewal of registrations expired on December 31, 1984; and (2) the two-month period for the renewal of registrations for the next such registration “period” extends from December 1, 1984, to January 31, 1985, and thus renewals of registrations expiring on January 31 would not be subject to the extra $5.00 fee if purchased before January 1 but would be subject to that fee if purchased after December 31.

We think it unreasonable to attribute an intent to create such absurd results to the legislature, especially when a simple, straightforward explanation of the plain meaning of the enactment (sections 1 and 3 of House Bill No. 965) is readily apparent. If the phrase “registration period” in section 3 is taken to mean the period for renewal of registrations, then all registrations which are to expire on February 28, 1985, would be subject to the extra $5.00 fee during the entire period of their eligibility for renewal (January 1 through February 28). Such an interpretation causes no anomalous results and is soundly grounded in the principle that the legislature knew the established administrative construction of article 6675a-3e, section 5.

SUMMARY

A county which adopted the optional $5.00 vehicle registration fee may begin charging it only on January 1, 1985, and only for the renewal of registrations which expire on February 28, 1985.

Very truly yours,

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney General

DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Colin Carl
Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE

Rick Gilpin, Chairman
Colin Carl
Susan Garrison
Tony Guillory
Jim Moellinger
Jennifer Riggs
Nancy Sutton