Occupational Tax - p11

1020755; 1020758; 1020763; 1020764; 1020768; 1020773

(1957); McPheeter v. City of Auburn 288 Ala. 286, 292, 259 So. 2d 833, 837 (1972) . Such circumstance aids us in

determining the meaning of the reference to gross receipts in § 40-12-4(b). See Abbott Labs. v. Durrett 746 So. 2d 316,

339 (1999)

‘In an effort to avoid indulging in conjecture or searching for imaginary purposes with respect to these . .. statutes, we. have followed the well- settled rule of statutory construction that it is permissible in ascertaining [ purpose and intent of a statute] to look to the history of the times, the existing order of things, the state of the law when the instrument was adopted, and the conditions necessitating such adoption. ‘ In re IJpshaw 247 Ala. [ at 223, 23 So. 2d [ at 863 [

In addition, a tax on an employer could be measured by gross receipts. Section 40-12-4(b) thus condemns taxes on gross receipts imposed on either the employee or the employer. Although the ordinance provides a deduction for the first $5,000 of income, counsel for the Board conceded at oral argument that that deduction could be reduced to $1 in the future and his argument in favor of the occupational tax would remain unchanged. It would exalt form over substance to deem the presence of a deduction sufficient to overturn the obvious legislative hostility to measuring tax liability by gross