Tennessee § 67-4-1709 - Liability for tax by certain individuals — Employer's option to remit.

§ 67-4-1709. Liability for tax by certain individuals — Employer's option to remit.

Each individual licensed or registered to engage in a vocation, profession, business, or occupation listed in § 67-4-1702(a) shall be liable for the tax. Any employer, including any governmental entity, may choose to remit the tax imposed by this part on behalf of persons subject to the tax who are employed by such employer. State agencies, including without limitation the University of Tennessee and the state university and community college system, are authorized to pay the privilege tax levied in this part on behalf of full-time state employees who are subject to the tax and who use the certification in their job duties, if an appropriation for such purpose is made in the general appropriations act. The payment by a state department or agency is subject to approval by the department or agency head and to this part. Acts 1993, ch. 485, §§ 1, 2; 2003, ch. 138, §§ 1, 2; 2003, ch. 355, § 53; 2003, ch. 418, § 8; 2013, ch. 454, § 18. Code Commission Notes. This section was amended three times in 2003, first by ch. 138, §§ 1 and 2, effective May 19, 2003; then by ch. 355, § 53, effective June 16, 2003; and finally by ch. 418, § 8, effective June 24, 2003, none of the acts referring to the others. The section as set out above reflects the amendment by ch. 355. The amendment by ch. 138 would have amended the section to read: “(a) Any municipal or county government is authorized to pay the tax imposed by this part on behalf of the professionals subject to the tax who are employed by such governmental entity. “(b) As used in this section, ‘municipal and county governments’ includes quasi-governmental entities such as developmental districts, utility districts, and other agencies performing governmental or proprietary functions on behalf of municipalities and counties, and associations composed of such quasi-government entities. “(c) This section only applies to those municipalities and counties that adopt its provisions by a majority vote of the municipal or county legislative body.” The 2003 amendment by ch. 418 purported to amend this section with provisions that are identical to those of ch. 355 and was given no effect. Compiler's Notes. Acts 2003, ch. 355, § 66 provided that no expenditure of public funds pursuant to the act shall be made in violation of the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as codified in 42 U.S.C. § 2000 d. Acts 2003, ch. 355, § 73 provided that there is established within the general fund the state-shared revenue reduction mitigation account. Any amounts in the state-shared revenue reduction mitigation account shall be applied by the commissioner of finance and administration to offset reductions in state-shared revenues allocated to local governments pursuant to the provisions of the act so that such reductions shall not exceed nine percent (9%) of state-shared revenues that otherwise would have been allocated to any such local government. Funds shall be restored on a pro rata basis taking into account the percentage reduction to each local government from each state-shared revenue source. Amendments. The 2013 amendment added (b). Effective Dates. Acts 2013, ch. 454, § 44. May 16, 2013. Attorney General Opinions. Increase in the professional privilege tax is not a decrease in a judge's compensation, OAG 03-081 (6/24/03). Payment of the professional privilege tax on behalf of judges by the judicial branch would constitute increased compensation and violate Tenn. Const., art. VI, § 7, OAG 03-081 (6/24/03). Amendments to the Professional Privilege Tax statutes by 2003 Pub. Acts 418, §§ 7 and 8, did not violate the constitutional doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity, and the tax validly applied to those professionals who had previously been exempted but who were licensed on June 1, 2003, OAG 03-100 (8/19/03). Payment of judges’ professional privilege tax by the judicial branch, OAG 05-090 (5/25/05). The judicial branch of the state government, as employer, may remit the professional privilege tax, as permitted under T.C.A. § 67-4-1709 , on behalf of judges employed by the State. Such a payment by the employer is not an “increase” in a judge’s compensation within the meaning of article VI, section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution. OAG 18-27, 2018 Tenn. AG LEXIS 25 (6/29/2018).