BILL ANALYSIS



C.S.H.B. 2610
By: Craddick
March 30, 1995
Committee Report (Substituted)


BACKGROUND

Chapter 33, Tax Code, addresses delinquent taxes for property tax
purposes and establishes that a tax receipt is used as evidence of
payment in a delinquent tax lawsuit.  This chapter does not
recognize the use of electronic replicas which are possible through
data imaging techniques that have been developed to efficiently
store large amounts of data electronically.

Chapter 41, Tax Code, provides for local review of property taxes. 
Hearing protests are often heard by panels consisting of three or
more ARB members.  Currently, Section 41.45(d) provides that an ARB
panel may not make a final determination of a protest.  The ARB
panel presents its recommendation to the full ARB for a final
decision.  When the recommendation is presented by the panel to the
full ARB, taxpayers may be unable to present their argument or
evidence before the members actually issuing the determination.

Section 41.61 requires the ARB hold a hearing to decide if good
cause exists to issue a subpoena.

PURPOSE

This bill proposes the following: (1) to include electronic replica
as evidence of payment; (2) to allow a rehearing of a protest if
the ARB does not accept the recommendation of a panel; (3) to
provide for written notice of those involved with a subpoena for a
good cause hearing.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly
grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer,
department, agency or institution.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1.  Amends Section 33.47 (Tax Records as Evidence), Tax
Code, by amending Subsection (c) to include electronic replica as
evidence of payment.

SECTION 2.  Amends Section 41.45 (Hearing on Protest), Tax Code, by
amending Subsection (d) to allow the ARB to refer a protest to a
panel for a rehearing if the board does not accept the
recommendation made by the panel.  The new panel shall be composed
of members who did not hear the original protest.  If there are not
three members who did not sit on the original panel, then the board
may determine the protest.  Before a rehearing by a panel or board,
notice shall be delivered in accordance with this Subchapter.

SECTION 3.  Amends Section 41.61 (Issuance of Subpoena), Tax Code,
by amending Subsection (c) to require that the ARB send written
notice at least 5 days before a good cause hearing to a person
named in a subpoena and to each party in the protest.  The person
cited in the subpoena is entitled to be heard at the hearing.

SECTION 4.  Effective date: September 1, 1995

SECTION 5.  Emergency clause



COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE

The original bill allowed a panel to determine a protest by written
order.  The committee substitute would require the panel to make a
recommendation to the full ARB, but if the board does not accept
the recommendation then the board may refer the protest to a new
panel for a rehearing or conduct a rehearing by the full board.

The original bill requires the ARB to provide written notice to
those involved with a subpoena for a good cause hearing 15 days
before the hearing.  The substitute changes the period to 5 days
before the hearing.


SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION

Public notice was posted in accordance with the rules, and a public
hearing was held on March 28, 1995.  Representative Craddick
explained the bill.  Without objection, H.B. 2610 was left pending
before the committee.

Pursuant to an announcement on the House Floor, the committee met
in a formal meeting on March 29, 1995 to consider H.B. 2610.  The
committee considered a complete substitute by Representative
Craddick.  Without objection, the committee adopted C.S.H.B. 2610. 
By a record vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 0 present not voting and 3
absent, the committee voted to report H.B. 2610 to the House as
substituted with the recommendation that it be sent to the Local
and Consent Calendar and that it do pass.



     Testimony received in favor of the bill (3-28-95):
           Dale Cummings, representing himself and the Texas Assn.
of Taxpayers
           Foy Mitchell, representing the Dallas Central Appraisal
District
           Breck Bostwick, representing himself and the Texas Assn.
of Property Tax            Professionals