STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

August 17, 1970

Lowell Schmidt, Commissioner of Revenue
State Capitol
Pierre, South Dakota 57501

OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 70-42

Motor Vehicle Registration Fee

Dear Mr. Schmidt:

You have requested my official opinion on the following subject.

Do the provisions of SDCL 32-5-45 require that a non-resident applicant for a South Dakota Motor Vehicle Title has himself paid a similar and equal tax in the state from which he comes to South Dakota, or is it sufficient that this tax imposed by SDCL 32-5-31, had been paid by any other person in that state?

An earlier opinion in this office, 1951-52 AGR 252, held that the tax must have been paid by the applicant himself. This was reaffirmed in 1955-56 AGR 335 and in addition it was held that the tax must not only have been paid by the individual himself but must have been paid in the state from which the applicant for registration came to South Dakota.

SDCL 32-5-45 insofar as is applicable here reads as follows:

... Sections 32-5-31, 32-5-32 and 32-5-35, shall apply to all motor vehicles not previously registered in this state, except the following: Motor vehicles owned by a nonresident coming into this state from another state, and registered or titled and licensed in such other state, ... shall be exempt from the initial original registration tax of this state to the extent of a similar and equal amount of registration, sales, use or state excise tax as has been paid in such other state . . .

In my opinion, the correct interpretation of this section is that there are two requirements basically for a nonresident to obtain reciprocity so far as a similar and equal tax is concerned. (1) That there has been paid a similar and equal tax on the motor vehicle without regard as to who paid that tax and (2) That the tax so paid must have been paid in the state from which the motor vehicle is being brought to South Dakota. In other words, if a tax were paid in State A by any person and the motor vehicle was moved from the state into South Dakota and here registered and titled or licensed, it would not again be subject to this original registration tax. If, however, the tax had been paid in State A and the motor vehicle thereafter had been removed to State B, where it was again titled and licensed and no tax paid in State B at that time, and thereafter removed to South Dakota, the tax thereupon would not have been paid in the state from which moving to South Dakota and there would be no exemption so far as a nonresident owner is concerned.

So far as prior opinions to the contrary are concerned, they are expressly overruled.

Respectfully submitted,

Gordon Mydland
Attorney General