The Texas Legislature has enacted H.B. 3612, establishing a three year pilot program which allows taxpayers an alternative to appealing Appraisal Review Board determinations to district court. The program applies to properties with an appraised value of $1 million or more in Bexar, Cameron, Dallas, El Paso, Harris, Tarrant and Travis counties. The program is effective January 1, 2010.

In the recently decided case of Ace Hardware Corp. v. Little, the State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division agreed with the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the taxpayer’s petitions for failing to meet it’s burden by a preponderance of evidence. The trial court found the taxpayer’s appraisal inappropriate, in large part, due to the fact that the taxpayer’s appraiser utilized a “reconstruction cost approach” which was “not included in the treaties traditionally relied upon by real estate appraisers”. I was hoping there would be more details describing the “reconstruction” approach, but the decision does not offer an explanation.

In the case of Aida Renta Trust v. Maricopa County the Arizona Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court decision finding that Maricopa County engaged in unconstitutional, discriminatory property tax valuation procedures. It appears as though Maricopa County decided to value properties within the same class (apartments) differently. The Decision states: 

“The County did not merely make an appraisal error; it applied a wholly different valuation procedure to properties within the same class. The County acted purposefully. The multiple incidences reaffirm the belief that they are systematic and intentional. We do not believe repeated taxation conduct is a random mistake.”

According to section 39-10-114(1)(a)(I)(A) of the Colorado Revised Statutes a taxpayer may file for an abatement of all or part of property taxes that have been levied “erroneously or illegally” within two years after January 1 of the year following the year in which the taxes were levied. The abatement provides for a refund of taxes due to “erroneous valuation for assessment”, “irregularity in levying”, “clerical error” or “overvaluation” and is different and separate from the “normal” property tax appeal process. 

In the recent case of HealthSouth Corporation v. Boulder County Board of Commissioners and Colorado State Board of Assessment Appeals, HealthSouth put this abatement provision to the test. 

HealthSouth filed two abatement petitions seeking to reduce the valuation of its personal property assets at two of its Colorado locations for the 2002 tax year. Now for the twist… 

In 2002 HealthSouth was found to be cooking its books and inflating earnings. In order to balance these cooked books HealthSouth created fictitious assets. The case reads: 

“The factual basis for the taxpayer’s abatement and refund claims is that in 2002, as part of a broader fraudulent scheme to increase the company’s stock price, taxpayer included fabricated valuations for fictitious assets in the personal property declaration schedules it filed.” 

So, HealthSouth’s new management filed abatement petitions with the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) seeking to reduce the personal property taxes it “overpaid” due to the reporting of nonexistent assets. The BOCC denied the petitions. Appeals were then filed to the Board of Assessment Appeals and were dismissed. HealthSouth appealed to the Court of Appeals. In a nutshell, the Court of Appeals determined: 

“Contrary to the BAA’s ruling, we conclude that, under the statutory scheme, taxpayer has the right to proceed with its abatement and refund claims on the ground of overvaluation, notwithstanding the fraudulent overstatement of its assets and valuations in its initial tax filings. Consequently, the BAA erred in dismissing taxpayer’s appeals without affording an evidentiary hearing, and on remand it must consider the merits of the taxpayer’s overvaluation claims concerning its personal property for the 2002 tax year.” 

I am looking forward to seeing how this will ultimately turn out. It will be interesting to see what HealthSouth provides as evidence to prove that the valuation of nonexistent assets was incorrect.

Don’t be surprised if the assessor’s office doesn’t welcome you with open arms when you file an appeal this year. Times are tough all around and taxing jurisdictions are no exception. Sales and income tax revenues are down and everyone knows that property taxes are in for a beating. When exactly the beating will take place seems to be a point of contention. If the volume of appeals being filed is any indication, taxpayers are claiming that the decline in values should be recognized now. Whereas, it appears as though assessor’s offices are claiming that value declines have not yet been reflected in the market. In other words, they seem to be taking the position that taxpayers will need to prove a decline in value. I discussed this issue in my earlier post Quantification Is King. 

So, what can we expect for 2009 appeals? 

• Due to assessor’s offices throughout the country receiving appeals near or at record numbers, large backlogs will be the norm. 
• Taxing jurisdictions may be reluctant or unwilling to settle cases due to budgetary concerns or time constraints.
• Assessor’s offices will, most likely, rely on the fact that a taxpayer carries the burden of proof in an appeal and proving values may be difficult due to the lack of recent transactions. 

For these and other reasons diligence and creativity will, no doubt, prove to play a very important role in 2009 property tax appeals.

Why we need to be diligent in conducting property tax assessment reviews. 

There are situations where, because of the ridiculous run up on property values over the past few years, a property’s assessment may have lagged behind the market and may have been under assessed. Even with the recent dramatic declines in property values the property may still be equitably or under assessed. 

Let’s say that you receive your 2009 assessment notice indicating the assessment of a property to be $1,000,000. The property was assessed at $1,000,000 for the 2008 tax year as well. Some might immediately say that there is no way the property is worth the same amount in 2009 as it was in 2008 and an appeal needs to be filed. However, let’s say that in 2008 the actual market value of the property was closer to $1,500,000, not the $1,000,000 that it was assessed at. If the value of the property has decreased by 30% between 2008 and now, the property might still be fairly assessed at $1,000,000. 

Without a proper review of the current and past market values of the property you might find yourself trapped into an unwarranted appeal. At best, money and resources are dedicated to an appeal with no savings potential and, at worst, you could find yourself fighting an increase. 

There are many savings opportunities out there and, of course, we need to be aggressive in discovering and pursuing them. However, we also must maintain a rational and diligent approach.

This is the first of a few posts I will make over the next few days to share my thoughts on a few issues that I think are worth consideration as we work our way through the 2009 appeal season. 

The 2009 property tax appeal frenzy is well underway. It’s sure to be one of busiest years in recent memory. There’s also no reason why it shouldn’t prove to be one of the most productive years in a long time. However, I think that there may be some misconceptions about what to expect and, perhaps as important, what not to expect.

 I think we all agree that values have declined. It’s close to impossible to argue otherwise. That said, we are not going to find ourselves ”shooting fish in a barrel”. 

There’s more to it than simply raising our arms and saying, “we all read the papers, we all watch the news…” Of course values have declined in virtually every sector. Companies and entire industries are facing double-digit loses. Closures and layoffs are rampant. Need I go on? 

So, why isn’t it as simple as filing an appeal and waiting for a refund check?

Quantification is king! 

Probably the most important issue that must be taken into consideration for tax appeals in 2009 can be summed up in one word: 

PROOF

Taxpayers carry the burden of proof in a tax appeal. They must prove that the assessment is excessive and in order to do that they must present evidence. However, thanks to the chaos in the capital markets and the resulting credit freeze, transactions are scarce, to say the least. An excerpt from a recent CoStar article reads:

“with the capital markets in disarray and few comparable transactions upon which to build a foundation, buyers and sellers can’t agree on pricing. 

In fact, one widely watched transaction-based index published at the MIT Center for Real Estate couldn’t even produce a retail index for the fourth quarter due to the dearth of transactions. The overall sample size for various other property markets was “scarily low,” acknowledged David Geltner, director of research at the MIT Center for Real Estate. ”

So, although we may all agree that values have declined, proving values for the 2009 tax year becomes more challenging due to the lack of reliable market information. 

2009 presents a great opportunity for companies to significantly reduce their property tax liabilities. However, It is not realistic to think that appeals will be a walk in the park simply because of the current economic conditions. If anything, 2009 tax appeals will require more work, diligence and creativity than in the past. The good news is that it will be worth it.