🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
TX 7406L2010D12 Motor Vehicle Tax 1974-06-17

Who remained liable when a vehicle seller collected tax from the buyer but failed to remit it to the county?

Short answer: Both faced consequences. A seller that properly completed the joint affidavit and retained sale records ordinarily had no tax liability. But if it accepted the buyer's tax money and failed to remit it, the Comptroller asserted a claim against the seller. The innocent purchaser still remained liable because the seller was not the State's legal agent.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1974. Ezel answers yours, under current Texas tax law, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1974
Subsequent statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later rulings may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, rate, or position mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This is a June 17, 1974 internal position letter to a regional manager, not a taxpayer-specific ruling. It applies former article 6.05's joint-affidavit and four-year record rules. Seller collection authority, seller and purchaser liability, agency status, county remittance, dealer records, audits, claims, and remedies may have changed. The audit discussion states an assumption because the report was unclear; this page does not present that assumption as a proven audit fact. STAR documents may no longer represent current policy even when not marked superseded. Audit and dealer details are redacted. This summary is informational only and is not legal or tax advice.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official state tax ruling. The original ruling (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The Comptroller could pursue a seller that collected vehicle tax and failed to remit it, but the buyer's historical tax liability still remained.

Former article 6.05 required a joint seller-purchaser affidavit stating total consideration and four years of complete sale records. A seller that properly complied ordinarily was relieved of tax liability.

An exception arose when the seller accepted tax money as an informal intermediary and did not pay the county collector. The Comptroller then asserted a claim against the seller. The innocent buyer was not discharged because the seller was not a legal agent of Texas.

The letter also reviewed a dealer audit, but the report did not clearly establish nonremittance; the author said that fact was assumed.

What this means for you

The internal position separated the State's claim against a nonremitting seller from the purchaser's underlying liability. One did not cancel the other.

Common questions

Q: Was the seller normally liable after proper affidavit and records?
A: No.

Q: What changed if the seller collected and kept the tax?
A: The Comptroller asserted a claim against the seller.

Q: Was the purchaser discharged?
A: No.

Citations and references

  • Article 6.05

Source

Original ruling text

COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
STATE OF TEXAS
AUSTIN, 78774

June 17, 1974

Mr. Jack Grace
Regional Manager
State Comptroller's Department
One Main Plaza - Room 998
1 Main Street
Houston, Texas 77002

Dear Sir:

With further reference to our several discussions on the subject, I here-
with state my position with regard to the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax respon-
sibility of the seller of the vehicle.

Article 6.05 requires that the seller make a joint affidavit with the
purchaser, listing the total consideration paid for the vehicle and that
the seller shall, for a period of four (4) years, keep a complete record
of each sale. Having properly complied with these requirements, the
seller
is relieved of any and all tax liability.

Although the seller is not authorized by the statutes to act as a
go-between
for the purchaser and the County Tax Assessor-Collector, it is common
practice.
Therefore, an exception to my above statement develops if the seller does
accept the tax from the purchaser and does not remit same to the County
Tax
Assessor-Collector, the Comptroller will then set-up a claim against the
seller. However, this omission on the part of the seller does not
relieve
the innocent purchaser of his tax liability, inasmuch as the seller was
not
a legal agent of the State of Texas.

I have reviewed Audit No. *** of ***** dba XYZ USED
CARS.
Although the audit report does not clearly make the statement, it was
assumed
that this was a case of the dealer accepting the money for the tax and
fail-
ing to pay the tax to the County Tax Assessor-Collector as mentioned in
the
previous paragraph.

I appreciate the interest you have shown in this matter and urge that you
again contact me if further information may be required.

With kind regards, I am

Yours very truly,
J. B. Craig, Director
AD VALOREM-INTANGIBLE TAX DIVISION

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1974 ruling on this question. Ezel checks current Texas tax law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.