logo
  • Home

Subscribe to Articles

Subscribe

 RSS

Email Alerts

Email Brett

Visit Our Website

http://www.intlappraisal.com

Twitter Updates

  • U.S. Commercial Property Deals May Slow. http://goo.gl/XjNv 6 hrs ago
  • Retail Leasing Continues to Strengthen, But Investment Activity Remains Sluggish. http://goo.gl/K8qm 1 day ago
  • Cook County - Debate continues over progress of property tax bills. http://goo.gl/pCvp 3 days ago
  • Slow Dealing Continues as Retail Investment Sales Volume Slides http://goo.gl/m7SO 3 days ago
  • More updates...
http://www.twitterbuttons.com

Recent Posts

  • Ohio Property Tax Appeals & Purchase Price Presumption
  • Virginia Property Tax Procedural Changes
  • Indiana Property Tax Assessment and Valuation Rules Amended
  • Persuasive Obsolescence Arguments Win Property Tax Appeals
  • Georgia’s “Property Tax Reform” Bill

Archives

  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009

Blogroll

  • 2009 Property Tax Calendar
  • IAC Website

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Summation Methodology Incorrect For Kansas Property Tax Valuation

Author: Brett Harrington Category: Appraisal, Property Tax Tags: Kansas Property Tax, Property Tax, Property Tax Appeal, Property Tax Appeals, Property Tax Protest, Tax Assessment

Thursday
Dec 10, 2009

The Kansas Court of Appeals recently reversed a decision by the District Court that set aside the opinion of the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals. At the center of the case was the valuation methodology employed by the taxing jurisdiction’s appraiser. The Court of Appeals found that the jurisdiction’s expert witness not only erred, but also violated USPAP by valuing the various segments of the property and summing the individual values to arrive at an overall valuation conclusion. The court relied upon USPAP Standard Rule 1-4(e):

“Pursuant to USPAP Standard Rule 1-4(e) (2001), an appraiser must analyze the effect on value, if any, of the assemblage of the various estates or component parts of a property and refrain from valuing the whole solely by adding together the individual values of the various estates or component parts. Although the value of the whole may be equal to the sum of the separate estates or parts, it also may be greater or less than the sum of such estates or parts. Therefore, the value of the whole must be tested by reference to appropriate data and supported by an appropriate analysis of such data.”

The Court goes on to state:

“There is no question that Kubert violated USPAP Rule 1-4(e). In executing each of his approaches to value, Kubert segmented the property, valued each segment individually, and then added the values to get his final valuation.”

The case can be found here.

  • Share/Bookmark

Click here to cancel reply.

Comment Form

Copyright 2010 Taxing Issues – Property Tax Blog - All Rights reserved.

Wordpress theme by: WPUnlimited