Martin v. . Guilford County

158 S.E. 847, 201 N.C. 63, 76 A.L.R. 978, 1931 N.C. LEXIS 181

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: June 15, 1931
• Status: Published

Opinion

CONNOR, J.

The question of law presented for decision by this appeal is whether property, real or personal, located in this State, and otherwise subject to taxation under its laws, is exempt from such taxation under the laws of the United States, because said property is owned by a veteran of the World War, who purchased and paid for the same with money paid to him by the government of the United States, under the provisions of the act of Congress for the relief of veterans of tbe World War. The decision of this question involves, primarily, a construction of the provisions of said act found in sections 454 and 618 of Title 38, U. S. C. A. Whether Congress has the power, under the Constitution of the United States, express or implied, to exempt property in this State from taxation under its laws, need not be discussed or decided, if these sections, properly construed, do not show' that Congress had the purpose or intent to exempt such property from taxation under the laws of this State by the enactment of said sections.

This question was considered and decided by the Supreme Court of Kansas in State ex rel. Smith, Atty.-Gen., v. Board of Commissioners of Shawnee County, decided on 10 January, 1931, 294 Pac., 915. In that case it was held that corporate securities held by the guardian of the minor children of a deceased veteran of the World War, as assets of the estate of his wards, are not exempt from taxation under the laws of the State of Kansas, because they were purchased and paid for by said guardian with money paid to him by the government of the United States on account of a certificate of war-risk insurance issued to and held by the father of his wards at his death. In the opinion in that case it is said: “We conclude that the intervention of a guardian does not leave the pension funds still in the hands of the government so that they are still 'payable’ or 'due’ the ward as expressed by 38 U. S. C. A., section 454, so as to exempt them from assignment, execution or taxes, but, when paid to the guardian, the title and possession have both passed from the government, and they are no longer 'payable,’ and consequently not entitled to any exemption from taxes under section 454.” 38 U. S. 0. A., section 618, provided that “no sum payable under this chapter to a veteran or his dependents . . . shall be subject to National or State taxation.” After the “sum payable,” has been paid to the veteran or his dependents, and invested in property, real or personal, otherwise subject to State taxation, the exemption provided for in section 618, is no longer applicable.

In the instant case the sum of money which was payable to plaintiff as a veteran of the World War, under the act of Congress, as compensation, insurance and maintenance and support allowance, has been paid to him; he has acquired full and unrestricted title to the money, free from any control over the same by the government of the United States; he has invested it, as he had a right to do, in the purchase of a lot of land and an automobile, which are subject to taxation by Guilford County, under the laws of this State.

We think it clear that by the enactment of sections 454 and 618, of Title 38 U. S. C. A., Congress has not undertaken to exercise any control over the property, real or personal, now owned by the plaintiff, and that said property is not exempt from taxation by Guilford County, under the laws of this State, applicable to said property as well as to all other property in said county.

There is no error in the judgment. Plaintiff having paid the taxes lawfully levied on his property, is not entitled to recover of the defendants the sum so paid. The judgment is

Affirmed.