Menu

Property Tax Resources

Each quarter our members take a close look at their local counties and municipalities and review any changes or notable events in the areas of property taxes, tax assessments, personal property tax and other taxation issues, here is the most recent local tax update available.

Jan
01

Alabama Property Tax Updates

UPDATED June 2024

Alabama Legislature Passes 7% Annual Cap

The Alabama legislature recently enacted a bill (HB73) that will establish a 7% cap on annual increases in assessed values for most real property parcels in the State.

The cap will go into effect beginning with the 2025 tax year (valuation date as of 10/1/24). The 7% cap shall not apply to: (i) real property that has never been assessed, (ii) new additions and improvements, excluding repairs and ordinary maintenance, (iii) changes in classification, (iv) changes in ownership, excluding some family transfers and redemptions, and (v) properties located within a tax increment district.

The cap legislation has a sunset provision of three years, meaning that the legislature must renew the legislation to extend the cap beyond the 2027 tax year.


Aaron D. Vansant, Esq.
DonovanFingar, LLC
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

California Property Tax Updates

UPDATED september 2025

California Supreme Court Issues Significant Opinion Concerning the Assessment of Intangible Assets in Property Taxation

On August 28, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued a significant, yet divided, opinion concerning the treatment of intangible assets in property taxation:  Olympic & Georgia Partners, LLC v. County of Los Angeles (2025) 2025 Cal. LEXIS 5622.  The Court rejected a broad, categorical rule that all intangible assets capable of valuation must be excluded from the assessed value of a property.  Instead, the Court looked at whether the income is “primarily attributable to enterprise activity or whether [it] constitute[s] ‘income of the real property or on account of its beneficial use.'"  (Olympic, 2025 Cal. LEXIS at 4.)  If the income is attributable to the enterprise activity (i.e., the business operating the property), it is a non-taxable intangible asset and must be excluded, but if the income is attributable to the real property itself, the Assessor may include that revenue stream when assessing the value of the property.  This was a narrow holding and applied to the particular deal structured in the case; however, taxpayers should still pay attention to the Supreme Court’s opinion.  The result is that taxpayers may structure their own agreements in ways that might avoid the tax implications that the Court applied to the plaintiff in this case.


Cris K. O'Neall and Bree E. Burdick
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Connecticut Property Tax Updates

Updated september 2024

Connecticut Real Estate Tax Update: 2024 Municipal Revaluations in Connecticut – Is Your Town Among Them?

It is always important to carefully review your tax bill and/or notices of assessments, but even more so in the year in which your city or town conducts a revaluation.

Each assessment should be carefully reviewed, even if your assessment has not increased substantially, as an appeal immediately after a revaluation maximizes a property owner's potential tax savings.

Connecticut law requires that each municipality conduct a general revaluation of the real estate within its borders at least once every five years. Given the passage of Connecticut Public Act 22-74, the State's Revaluation Schedule has shifted slightly with the creation of five new Revaluation Zones which purportedly allows for the coordination of revaluation services and provides a mechanism to create efficiency and municipal cost savings. This new law does not change the fact that municipalities must conduct revaluations in Connecticut every five years, however, the result is that some municipal revaluations are a year shorter or longer to transition into the new schedule.

The purpose of a revaluation is for a municipality to determine the market value of real estate to be used to calculate property taxes.

Once a property's value is set in a general revaluation, it remains constant over the entire five-year cycle, absent appeal, demolition, improvements or expansion. Of course, the annual taxes usually increase, as a municipality's mill rate increases incrementally from year to year. Municipalities across the State are on differing revaluation cycles.

The following is a list of Connecticut municipalities conducting revaluations this year:

Bloomfield
Branford
Brooklyn
Canterbury
Coventry
Hamden
Mansfield
Monroe
New Fairfield
North Branford
North Haven
Old Lyme
Oxford
Pomfret
Prospect
Putnam
Seymour
Thompson
Tolland
Torrington
Voluntown
Wallingford
West Haven
Windsor Locks*
Woodbridge

*One-year delay as Revaluation was originally scheduled for 10/1/2023

If your municipality is conducting a general revaluation for the October 1, 2024 Grand List you will receive a notice of tax assessment change soon.

Once the notices are issued, there may be a chance to meet informally with the assessor to discuss the new assessment, which should represent 70% of the fair market value of your real estate. However, if a property owner wishes to challenge the assessment formally, a written appeal must be filed with the local Board of Assessment Appeals by the February 20, 2025 statutory deadline.

It is in your best interest to be proactive in monitoring the revaluation process and your new assessment so that you can take all necessary steps to ensure that the assessment is equitable.


Nicholas W. Vitti Jr. and Joseph D. Szerejko
Murtha Cullina LLP
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Florida Property Tax Updates

UPDATED june 2025

Property Tax Reform in Florida

The Governor, Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Senate President are considering significant property tax reform in 2026.  Although no reform passed in the 2025 legislative session, the House created a Select Committee on Property Taxes, which has already met two times and will continue to gather information about the sources and uses of property tax revenue.  In addition, the legislature passed a bill directing the Office of Economic and Demographic Research to conduct a study and establish a framework to reduce or eliminate property taxes for homestead property.  Some of the initial proposals before the House Select Committee were local referenda to eliminate homestead property taxes, increasing the current homestead exemption to $500,000 on non-school taxes, with a further increase to $1 million for seniors or long-term residents, as well as lowering the cap on annual assessment increases.  Many of these ideas would require constitutional amendments which could be on the ballot as early as the fall of 2026. 


Julie M. Schwartz, Esq.
Rennert Vogel Mandler & Rodriguez, P.A.
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Georgia Property Tax Updates

UPDATED September 2025

Supreme Court Rules on Application of Income Components for LIHTC Property Valuation

In Gateway Pines Hahira, L.P. v. Lowndes Cty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, S25G0196 (August 26, 2025), the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision in Gateway Pines Hahira, LP v. Lowndes County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 372 Ga. App. 705, 906 S.E.2d 421 (2024), and overruled Freedom Heights, L.P. v. Lowndes Cty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 369 Ga. App. 725, 894 S.E.2d 438 (2023). The Supreme Court held that O.C.G.A. §48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) restricts the use of the income approach by stating that, when determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties, tax credits may be treated as actual income only if the assessor can demonstrate that they produce real income for the titleholder. In practice, this method has very limited application, since Section 42 tax credits generally do not represent or generate actual income under their current structure.

Lisa F. Stuckey
Georgia Property Tax Counsel, LLC
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Illinois Property Tax Updates

Updated june 2025

Illinois Q2 Update

The northern suburbs of Cook County, Illinois, are currently being reassessed for 2025. All appeal deadlines are currently still open for all properties in Illinois.

Additionally, due to ongoing technical issues within the Cook County Assessor’s Office, second installment property tax bills will be delayed by at least one month beyond the statutory August due date, consistent with delays in the previous two years. The postponement of the expected August 1, 2025 due date may push billing into the peak consumer season. This is the 3rd time tax bills have been late under Fritz Kaegi tenure.

The Assessor’s Office attributes the delay to Tyler Technologies, its contracted vendor for modernizing assessment data systems. However, other tax officials allege administrative mismanagement, citing the Assessor’s failure to timely transmit initial assessment data to the Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR). Although assessment work concluded in December 2024, data was not submitted to IDOR until April 30, 2025—three months later than the prior year.

Tyler Technologies reportedly failed to meet key deadlines in November 2024 and January 2025. The project was elevated to “High” priority on January 30, 2025, prompting weekly coordination meetings. Despite this, early versions of required IDOR reports remained defective, requiring manual reconstruction and significant workarounds. The final report was not transmitted until May 12, 2025.

This report is essential for IDOR’s issuance of the tentative and final Cook County Equalization Factors, which underpin second installment tax computations. Unlike in 2024, when both were issued by May 20, IDOR confirmed it cannot expedite both factors concurrently. Notably, this marks the first year the report was generated using the Assessor’s newly implemented “state-of-the-art” system rather than the legacy mainframe.

Finally, the Cook County Equalization Rate for 2024 has been published: 3.0355


“Molly” Mary A. Phelan
Siegel Jennings
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Kentucky Property Tax Updates

UPDATED september 2025

Major Win for Kentucky Big Box Properties

In a blistering, “to be published” opinion, the Kentucky Court of Appeals sided with a big-box retailer and seemingly rejected the “dark store” theory.  In Lowe’s Home Centers v. Arnold, No. 2024-CA-0307-MR (Aug. 22, 2025), the court criticized the Kentucky Board of Tax Appeals’ (“KBTA”) methodology for valuing an owner-occupied property.  The KBTA relied on unadjusted sales of leased Lowe’s to value an owner-occupied location, on the theory that any future sale of the property would be a sale/leaseback to Lowe’s or to a similarly creditworthy tenant.  The court found that the PVA’s appraiser’s value was “manufactured” and “not based on evidence.”  Instead, the court held that the Kentucky Constitution requires that the property should have been valued based on the fair cash value of “a lease to a buyer in general” in the area.  While the court that leased properties may be used as comparables for unleased properties, it noted that the leased comparables must be adjusted to render them comparable.

The court rejected the PVA’s argument that the comparable sales approach requires that vacant properties must be adjusted to account for their vacant status.  The court called the “dark store” theory a “red herring” that is “unsupported both in the law and in practice.”  Lowe’s appraiser’s conclusion that the property was only worth as much as it could be sold as a vacant store “is precisely what is required under the Kentucky Constitution.”

The county has filed a petition for rehearing, so the decision is not final – but if the case holds, it will represent the first published decision in Kentucky rejecting the “dark store” theory.


Michele M. Whittington
Morgan Pottinger McGarvey
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Massachusetts Property Tax Updates

UPDATED december 2022

Massachusetts Fiscal Year 2023 Property Tax Bills are to be issued

Most jurisdictions in Massachusetts sent out there actual fiscal year 2023 property tax bills during December of 2022.  The actual property tax bill is the first tax bill of the fiscal year that contains as assessed value and a tax rate. It is from this actual property tax bill that rights of appeal accrue. In most cases the fiscal year 2023 filing deadline is February 1, 2023. It is important to review your actual property tax bill as many communities in the Commonwealth are revaluing. In most cases the timely payment of property taxes is a jurisdictional prerequisite to a valid property tax appeal. Timely payment means that payment must be mailed to the tax collector by the due date. It is incumbent on the taxpayer to prove the date of mailing. Taxpayers must be vigilant as the taxing authority has the advantage at every turn.

David G. Saliba
Saliba & Saliba
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Michigan Property Tax Updates

UPDATED june 2025

The Michigan Supreme Court Is Reviewing Whether a Business Property’s Taxable Value Can Be Uncapped for Replacement Construction

On May 22, 2025, the Michigan Supreme Court granted leave to appeal in Knier Powers Martin & Smith LLC v Bay City, SC: 167593, COA: 366114, MTT: 22-001900.

In Michigan, the annual increase in the taxable value of property is generally capped at the rate of inflation or 5%, whichever is less.  An exception for this is when there is an “addition” to the property.  In this case, the taxpayer, a law firm, replaced the roof on its office building in Bay City, in 2021. Because of the roof project, Bay City uncapped the property’s taxable value, adding value attributable to the replacement roof in tax year 2022. Bay City asserted the replacement roof was an “addition” not subject to the general cap on increases to taxable value. Bay City asserted the replacement roof was “new construction” which is a type of addition as defined in MCL 211.34d(1)(b)(iii). “New construction” is property “not in existence on the immediately preceding tax day” and is not replacing property damaged or destroyed by accident or act of God. MCL 211.34d(1)(b)(iii), (v).

The Tax Tribunal and Court of Appeals agreed with Bay City. The Michigan Court of Appeals held that “the installation of a new roof on a commercial building was ‘new construction,’ and, therefore,” it was an “addition” that was not subject to the taxable value cap. The issue is now before the Michigan Supreme Court to finally decide.

Jackie Cook, Stewart Mandell, Daniel Stanley
Honigman LLP
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Nevada Property Tax Updates

Updated march 2022

Recapture Tax: The Exception To Nevada’s Tax Cap

Historically, property taxes were calculated by simply multiplying the taxable value of a parcel by the assessment rate and multiplying the resulting product by the tax rate.  This simple approach provided a level of uniformity, but in a rising market the increase in a property owner’s taxes would mirror the increase in the value of the property owner’s parcel.  A real estate market that continues to rise, year-after year, would cause taxes to escalate, squeezing those living on a fixed income.  To address this problem, the Nevada Legislature passed a partial abatement from property tax which applies to all properties.  This legislation is commonly referred to as the tax cap because it limits the amount taxes can increase, from one year to the next, to a fixed percentage.  This ensures predictability and stability in the tax treatment of a parcel – unless the valuation of the parcel triggers the recapture tax imposed by NRS 361.4725.

The recapture tax is triggered when, during a three year period, the taxable value of a parcel declines by 15% or more followed by an increase in value of 15% or more.  If the valuation of a parcel fits this roller-coaster pattern the resulting recapture tax can come as a surprise.  The impact is illustrated by the following example which is based on the assessor’s valuation of an actual parcel.

In year 1 the parcel was assigned a taxable value of $1,234,800.  In year 2 the taxable value dropped to $840,351 – a decline 32%.   The tax in year 2 (based on an assessment rate of 35% and tax rate of 3%) would be $8,824.

In year 3 the value of the parcel increased to $1,430,800 – an increase of 70%.  Despite the increase in value the tax cap limits the tax assessment to an increase of no more than $706 – 8% of the tax paid in year 2.  However, the fluctuation in value would trigger the assessment of a recapture tax of $1,515 in year 3. 

In this example the property owner would be assessed the 8% increase allowed by the tax cap and the 17% increase attributable to the recapture tax (although collection of the recapture tax would be spread over 3 years). 

Property owners appreciate the predictability provided by the tax cap in a rising real estate market but are often unaware that a recapture tax might be assessed.  No notice of the pending assessment is given; it just shows up on the tax bill.  Consequently, for many the assessment comes as an unwelcome surprise.

The tax bills for tax year 2022-23 will be issued in July.  Many of those bills are likely to include the assessment of a recapture tax because, following the outbreak of the coronavirus and the closure of businesses, the assessor assigned reduced values to many properties for tax year 2021-22.  Then, after businesses reopened and the incidence of infection waned, the assessor increased the values for tax year 2022-23.  This valuation pattern is likely to trigger the assessment of recapture tax for some properties.

It is always important to critically review the tax treatment of your property, but this year there will be one added factor to consider – the recapture tax.  Our property tax attorneys know the critical legal and valuation factors that affect the tax treatment of property in Nevada and are prepared to assist property owners in evaluating and, when appropriate, challenging that tax treatment.


Paul D. Bancroft
McDonald Carano
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

New Hampshire Property Tax Updates

Updated december 2022

New Hampshire property tax bills have been issued

Most communities in New Hampshire have sent out their 2022 property tax bills. These tax bills have an assessing date of April 1, 2022. The property tax assessment of taxable real estate should be the fee simple market value of the property as of April 1, 2022, multiplied by the jurisdiction's median assessment ratio. If your property is assessed in excess of that amount, you may have grounds for a tax appeal. In general, abatement applications must be filed with the local assessors by March 1, 2023. If you are aggrieved by the action or inaction of the local assessors, you may file a petition with the State Board of Tax and Land Appeals or the Superior Court in the County where the property is located. The deadline for filing the petitions is generally September 1, 2023. There you will be afforded a full hearing on the merits where the rules of evidence will apply.

David G. Saliba
Saliba & Saliba
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Ohio Property Tax Updates

UPDATED september 2025

Twelfth District Court of Appeals Holds a Board of Education Need Not Prove Jurisdictional Requirements at Time of Initial Filing

House Bill 126 was signed into law on April 21, 2022 and became effective July 21, 2022. Among other changes, the bill amended Ohio Revised Code 5715.19, which regulates who may file a tax valuation complaint and the circumstances that must exist for a complaint to be filed.

As amended, R.C. 5715.19 requires that, for a complaint seeking a value change based on an arm’s length sale to be valid, the property must have been sold in an arm's length transaction, before, but not after the tax lien date for the tax year for which the complaint is to be filed.  It also mandates that the sale price must exceed the true value of the property appearing on the tax list for that tax year by both ten per cent and the amount of the filing threshold determined under section (J) of the amended code (approximately $550,000).

On September 8, 2025, the Twelfth District issued a decision in Snider Crossing v Warren BOR, 2025-Ohio-3189, related to these statutory changes.  Here, a school board filed a complaint seeking a reduction based on an alleged sale evidenced through CoStar.  Ohio law holds a sale is the best evidence of a property’s value.  Generally, a sale is evidenced through submission of a deed and conveyance fee statement or a deed and purchase agreement.  None of these documents were submitted in support of the alleged sale.

The Taxpayer moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing the school board failed to prove the jurisdictional requirements to file a complaint had been met.  The school board presented an appraisal and testimony that included alleged verification of the sale.  The board of revision issued a decision adopting the sale.

On appeal, the Ohio Board of Tax Appeals likewise assigned value at the sale price, finding the school board’s burden had been met.  The purchase agreement was sought and disclosed through discovery (not available at the board of revision level of litigation in Ohio) and assisted the school board in demonstrating that a sale had occurred.

On appeal to the Twelfth, the Court found no requirement for immediate proof of jurisdictional facts.  While those facts must exist for jurisdiction, 5715.19 does not mandate how or when those facts must be demonstrated.  It found jurisdiction is based on whether there was a sale, not contemporaneous proof of that sale.  Requiring a sale to be proven at the time of filing could prohibit a meaningful opportunity for a party to demonstrate its right to relief.  Further, different boards of revision could apply differing evidentiary standards, leading to inconsistencies.

Further updates to follow as additional House Bill 126-based matters work their way through Ohio appellate courts.

Kristopher Nicoloff
Siegel Jennings Co., L.P.A.
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Oklahoma Property Tax Updates

UPDATED september 2025

Oklahoma Law Requires Timely Payment of Taxes Under Written Notice of Protest

Treasurers across Oklahoma will begin mailing 2025 tax bills in October. By law, the taxes are due by December 31st, but the taxpayer has the option of making two equal installment payments, one on December 31st and the other on the following March 31st.

If a taxpayer has a protest pending, it is imperative that the taxes be paid timely, with an accompanying written notice of protest on OTC Form 990 specifying the amount of tax being paid under protest. By law, the treasurer must escrow the disputed taxes pending outcome of the appeal.  Failure to pay timely, or failure to pay under notice of protest, subjects the taxpayer’s appeal to dismissal.

Brittany N. Dowd
Elias, Books, Brown & Nelson, P.C.
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Oregon Property Tax Updates

UPDATED september 2023

Oregon Taxation of Delta Airlines Intangible Property Unconstitutional

In Oregon, centrally assessed properties have historically been subject to assessment of their intangible property. While locally assessed properties are statutorily exempt from taxation of intangible property, which includes a business’s work force, customer lists, patents, trademarks, trade secrets, goodwill, and contacts. 

In a significant decision, the Oregon Tax Court concluded that this statutory scheme, the taxation of intangible property listed for centrally assessed businesses, violated the Oregon Uniformity Clause and the federal Equal Protection Clause. The opinion was specific to Delta Airlines, because the court found no genuine differences between Delta’s (taxable) use of intangible property in its transportation business and the (exempt) use of intangible property in road transportation businesses or other businesses that rely on a network of property. How the court will later interpret “other businesses that rely on a network of property” is yet to be seen.

In this same decision, the court rejected the PacifiCorp’s regulated utility challenge because the court found genuine differences between PacifiCorp’s (taxable) use of intangible property in its business as a regulated public utility and (exempt) uses of intangible property in non-regulated businesses. Additionally, the court concluded the legislature could have determined that taxing the value of intangible property of a utility compliments the regulatory scheme by redistributing for public purposes some value that accrues through regulated operation that would otherwise be inure to investor-owners. 

As of the date of this writing, the Department of Revenue had not appealed this decision.

Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, No. TC 5409, 2023 WL 5425246 (Or. T.C. Aug. 23, 2023).


Cynthia M. Fraser
Foster Garvey PC
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Pennsylvania Property Tax Updates

UPDATED March 2025

Pennsylvania Legislator Proposes Cyclical Reassessment System

In January 2025, Pennsylvania State Senator Wayne Fontana announced that he plans to introduce legislation to move Pennsylvania to a cyclical reassessment system, as is the system in nearly every other state.

This is good news for taxpayers and other stakeholders. Pennsylvania is the only state in the United States to have a “base year” system under which counties can choose to stay in their “base year” (last year of the countywide reassessment) indefinitely. The State of Delaware - the only other state which had a base year system – in a decision by its highest court -- declared in May 2020 that a base year system of assessment is unconstitutional.

Due to Pennsylvania’s base year system, it is not uncommon for counties to fail to reassess for decades or more. The Pennsylvania County with the oldest reassessment year is Franklin County (south central Pennsylvania) which last reassessed in 1961. Pennsylvania is also one of a handful of states that allows government bodies to file increase assessment appeals (labeled “illegal spot appeals” in most states).  These two factors taken together – a county’s failure to reassess coupled with a school district’s right to “cherry pick” some taxpayers for increase appeals – leads to, as a practical matter, a disparate tax experience (especially for commercial taxpayers who tend to be the targets of school increase appeals) and a complete lack of uniformity in taxation, contrary to Pennsylvania ‘s Constitution.

APTC Western Pennsylvania Representative Sharon F. DiPaolo, Esquire, CRE, was invited to testify at Senator Fontana’s July 2024 hearing on the need for cyclical reassessment in Pennsylvania.  Ms. DiPaolo’s testimony called for cyclical reassessment to address the best practices of tax policy, namely, fundamental fairness, transparency, and consistency. As of this writing, the proposed legislation is in the process of being drafted. Siegel Jennings will advise of developments as they occur.

In the meantime, to discuss the specifics of this proposed legislation or your property tax needs in Pennsylvania, please reach out to:

Sharon F. DiPaolo, EsquireSiegel Jennings, Co., L.P.A.
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Rhode Island Property Tax Updates

Updated December 2022

File an account to protect your right of appeal

Now is the time for Rhode Island taxpayers to preserve their right of appeal for Tax Year 2023 by filing an account with the local assessor. In most jurisdictions the Tax Year 2023 tax bill will be sent out during the summer of 2023. The Tax Year 2023 tax bill has a valuation or assessing date of December 31, 2022. In most cases the filing of a valid account by January 31, 2023, is a prerequisite to a valid appeal. The account must describe the property, claim a value of the property, and be signed under oath and notarized. Occasionally the assessors do not send out account forms or the form may omit a section on real estate. It is incumbent upon the taxpayer to seek out a form and add a section for real estate if needed and properly complete and file it. It is acceptable for a taxpayer to construct his own account form, but it must include all required information and be signed under oath, notarized, and filed timely.

David G. Saliba
Saliba & Saliba
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Tennessee Property Tax Updates

UPDATED september 2025

The Role of Equalization in Tennessee Property Tax Appeals

Equalization is a concept that is meant to ensure that property assessments are equitable so no one taxpayer is unfairly taxed on their property compared to their neighbor with comparable property.

In Tennessee, however, equalization arguments are generally insufficient to achieve value reductions.  The standard for valuation in Tennessee is 100% of market value.  The State Board of Equalization does not see reductions to below market value as consistent with that standard.  Taxpayers are told that if the neighbor’s comparable property is appraised below 100% of its market value, then the only remedy is to raise the value of the neighbor’s property. 

To prevail on an equalization argument in Tennessee, the taxpayer must show proof that the entire surrounding area of comparable property benefitted from systematic undervaluation, and that the taxpayer’s property somehow avoided that benefit.  If a taxpayer believes that they have a strong equalization argument, they should seek the counsel of a property tax attorney.


Andy Raines
Evans Petree PC
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Texas Property Tax Updates

Updated september 2024

Texas 1st Court of Appeals Provides an Important Reminder — the Filing Deadlines are Unforgiving

In Texas, fall is for football and escalating property tax protests. There are three different forums to escalate a Texas property tax protest that did not fall in your favor: (1) district court; (2) binding arbitration; and (3) State Office of Administrative Hearings. Each of these have unforgivably time sensitive deadlines and is highlighted by a recent case out of Texas’s 1st Court of Appeals.

In Harris Central Appraisal District v. Zheng, the property owner’s protest was denied and he decided to escalate by filing a lawsuit in district court. Section 42.21(a) of the Texas Property Tax Code establishes the time limit for this — 60 days after receiving the notice of the protest denial (known locally in Texas as a “board order”). Here, the property owner received the board order on September 5, 2020, making the lawsuit filing deadline November 4, 2020. But the property owner did not file until November 12, 2020. This is late and the district court dismissed his lawsuit.

To avoid the dismissal, the property owner attempted to argue that the intent of his pleadings must be considered in determining whether he complied with the 60-day deadline. Specifically, he intended to file the lawsuit timely but couldn’t because of extraordinary circumstances (Covid-19 and suffering a flesh wound on his left thumb). The 1st Court rejected this and recognized it as an acknowledgement that the property owner failed to file the lawsuit by the 60-day deadline and upheld the dismissal.

The takeaway from this quarterly blast is do not wait; file early if anything! The deadlines for escalating a protest that does not fall in your favor is unforgiving if missed, even by a day. This is true regardless of extraordinary circumstances, such as a global pandemic or serious injury (as shown by the above case). So, be vigilant in computing, knowing, and tracking deadlines.

To review the Opinion from Harris Cent. Appraisal Dist. v. Zheng, click the following link (or copy and paste): https://search.txcourts.gov/SearchMedia.aspx?MediaVersionID=82de247b-32b6-4bac-bc35-d051520e00cc&coa=coa01&DT=Opinion&MediaID=4bc8c61b-83a4-4d5e-abb5-61ac4a60328e.

Lee D. Winston
Michel Gray & Rogers LLP
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Washington DC. Property Tax Updates

updated june 2022

Proposed Changes to Assessment Appeal Process

In the District of Columbia, the assessment appeal calendar was designed for taxpayers to complete the two-level administrative appeal process prior to the payment of their property taxes. As a result, taxpayers often pay lower property taxes in the first instance as a result of successful administrative appeals, instead of paying higher taxes and then challenging the assessment through an administrative appeal.

The Office of Tax & Revenue (“OTR”) in the District of Columbia has recently proposed significant changes to the administrative appeal calendar, which is governed by the D.C. Code. Although proposed assessments are currently issued by March 1st each year, under OTR’s proposal, new assessments would be issued later in the calendar year. OTR’s justification for the change is that this would purportedly allow the assessors time to review the property’s most recent financial data that is reported annually through the Income & Expense report filing prior to the issuance of the assessment.

OTR's proposal suffers from serious flaws that would weaken the current protections provided to taxpayers. First, issuing assessments later in the year would necessarily push back or truncate the administrative appeal process. This would either result in a compressed administrative appeal calendar that does not provide the opportunity for sufficient review of taxpayers’ claims, or it would place taxpayers in the unenviable position of paying property taxes prior to the issuance of a decision on their administrative appeal. Second, diminishing the effectiveness of the administrative appeal structure that is currently in place would lead to additional appeals filed in D.C. Superior Court and burden the court system with appeals. Third, OTR alleges that its proposal would result in more “accurate” assessments. In our experience, however, more “accurate” assessments from OTR mean an unjustified increase in taxpayers’’ liability.  

In sum, the D.C. Code’s administrative appeal process was carefully crafted to provide a robust administrative appeal process for taxpayers, and there is no legitimate justification for tinkering with the current appeal calendar.


Wilkes Artis, Chtd.
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading
Jan
01

Wisconsin Property Tax Updates

Updated March 2025

Wisconsin Tax Appeals Commission Rejects State’s Attempt To Divest It Of Jurisdiction Over Large Tax Appeals

In a decision issued on March 11, 2025, the Wisconsin Tax Appeals Commission rejected an attempt by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue to divest it of subject matter jurisdiction over a large group of manufacturing assessment appeals involving millions of dollars in value.

The jurisdictional statute (Wis. Stat. 70.995(8)(c)1) states that objections to manufacturing assessments must be made “on a form prescribed by the department of revenue that specifies that the objector shall set forth the reasons for the objection … and the basis for” the objector’s opinion of value. The appeal form the Department of Revenue created under this statute includes a section for the objector to provide these two pieces of information. That section contains two adjacent boxes, one designated for the reason for the taxpayer’s objection and the other for the basis of the taxpayer’s opinion of value.

In the appeals in question, the taxpayers’ agent had placed text encompassing both pieces of information in the first box and left the second box blank. The State argued that leaving the second box blank per se divested the Commission of subject matter jurisdiction irrespective of whether all the required information was in the other box or elsewhere on the form.

The Tax Appeals Commission firmly rejected the State’s position, holding that as long as a taxpayer provides all the information required by the statute on the Department’s form the taxpayer has satisfied the jurisdictional requirement, whether or not the taxpayer has placed text in every box. The Commission’s decision was unusually harsh, finding one of the Department of Revenue’s arguments to be “frankly ridiculous,” and admonishing the Department to “restrain itself from making such frivolous and overreaching arguments” in future cases.

The case is Badger Mining Corporation and Smart Sand, Inc v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue.

Bryan J. Cecil
Hansen Reynolds LLC
American Property Tax Counsel (APTC)

Continue reading

American Property Tax Counsel

Recent Published Property Tax Articles

Taxing Real Estate On Redevelopment Prospects

When a property's current use isn't highest and best, New Jersey jurisdictions can assess and tax based on hypothetical redevelopment.

It's hard to imagine a more dystopian world than one in which governments base real estate tax upon a hypothetical use other than a property's current and actual use. Unfortunately, taxing...

Read more

How to Navigate New York's Property Tax Exemptions

The Empire State's exemptions can undoubtedly be subject to interpretation, and some communities ultimately opt out.

Property taxes are a substantial expense for businesses and commercial property owners in New York, and taxpayers in the state are contesting property assessments in record numbers. Many owners are going the extra mile, however...

Read more

Untangling Hotel Valuation for Texas Property Taxes

Valuing hotels for property taxation is one of the most complex and contested areas in real estate appraisal. And unfortunately for hotel owners, improper assessment is common and costly.

Unlike office buildings or warehouses, hotels are not just physical assets — they are operating businesses. This distinction requires appraisers to carefully...

Read more

Member Spotlight

Members

Forgot your password? / Forgot your username?