Commercial real estate owners should build arguments now to reduce fair market value on their properties affected by the pandemic.

The uncertainties and changes brought on by COVID-19 have had far-reaching effects on all facets of daily life. As commercial property owners position themselves to weather the storm, it is crucial that taxpayers most affected by the virus do what they can to control their property tax expenses.

The issues they face are complex, from pre-crisis valuation dates and the need to quantify value losses, to cash-strapped taxing entities that will be reluctant to compromise on values. Taxpayers will need creative, innovative approaches to successfully protest their assessments and see their cases through to having their taxable property values reduced.

Ohio mulls relief

Assessors in Ohio and many other states value real property as of Jan. 1 of the tax year under protest, known as the tax lien date. Other than when a property has recently sold, assessors and courts seldom consider factors occurring after the tax lien date in a property tax case.

For example, the current property tax filing period in Ohio relates to tax year 2020, and real property is required to be valued as of Jan. 1, 2020, for that tax year. That means valuations for 2020 in those jurisdictions typically ignore changes to a property's value that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ohio is the only state considering legislation that would require taxing authorities to recognize the effects of COVID-19 on real estate values where the impact occurred after the tax lien date. Depending on where a property is located, taxpayers will need to consider all options if their jurisdiction does not allow for consideration of the impact of COVID-19 in a tax challenge this year.

When it comes to deciding whether to challenge a property's assessment, there are many factors to consider. If the property recently sold, analyze the sales price to indicate the actual market value of the real estate deducting any non-real estate values. Then factor in the pandemic-related issues.

The taxpayer may need to order an appraisal, whether to support their own complaint or in fighting a tax increase complaint filed by a school district. These circumstances are more likely in some jurisdictions than others; experienced local counsel can help the taxpayer decide whether, and when, to obtain an appraisal.

At times, taxing authorities or a court may require testimony from a property owner or other individuals associated with a property. Many taxing authorities are allowing testimony via popular video conferencing applications, which may make it easier than in the past to seek the involvement of witnesses for a hearing.

Variations by property type

Market trends affecting specific property types and operations will provide evidence to support many assessment protests. Hotels, for example, have been directly impacted by COVID-19, therefore data for hotel properties must be carefully evaluated in light of current events.

Compile historical information such as 2020 financials as soon as possible, as well as recent occupancy reports. Hotel owners must be prepared to testify along with their expert appraisal witnesses.

First-hand knowledge of the devastating effects of COVID-19 will be an important component of a case. While Ohio courts in the past have generally disfavored the discounted cash flow method of valuing commercial properties, expert witnesses may need to explore, use, and be prepared to explain that option in a post COVID-19 world.

It is important to note that COVID-19 has not affected all property types in the same manner. The pandemic devastated many hotels, restaurants, and certain retail and office properties, for example. On the other hand, other properties such as industrial properties serving ecommerce operations have fared well.

How trends relating to property type translate into a potential reduction in a property's fair market value depends on what a particular jurisdiction requires from taxpayers to prove their case. Property sales data from 2020 to the present will become an important component of any property tax review, given the events of the past several months. Discussions with an appraiser familiar with local data and trends will be critical.

Even if a taxpayer cannot reference COVID-19 effects in a challenge filed this year, they should consider effective strategies now in preparation for future property tax issues related to the pandemic. Most likely this will involve a long-term approach to contain property taxes, while addressing short-term needs as best as possible. A case settlement may address several tax years, giving the taxpayer some certainty and planning capabilities for the future.

Additionally, a plan for how to approach a case often depends on the regional property tax landscape. Because of this, achieving a good outcome in the future may depend on how the taxpayer prepares their case from the outset, affecting decisions such as whether to have an appraisal and which parties should testify.

The best means to address recent change and today's uncertainties are to remain adaptable and to begin forming effective case strategies as soon as property tax expenses become available for evaluation.

Closely examine your 2021 tax assessment to ensure your property's valuation isn't excessive.

   E-commerce was here to stay even before the pandemic devastated small businesses and placed an even greater premium on technology. In the changed landscape, lowering occupancy costs by reducing property taxes is one of the most important steps businesses can take to remain competitive.

  Stay-at-home orders still prevent many shoppers from visiting their favorite brick-and-mortar stores, while fear of contagion exacerbates consumers' reluctance to shop in person. Regardless of customer traffic, however, retailers still incur fixed costs including insurance, enterprise software, property taxes and, arguably, rent.

  Online-only retailers' occupancy costs are much lower, making it difficult for small brick-and-mortar businesses to compete. Put differently, sales taxes decline with reduced sales but property taxes do not. Landlords and tenants in triple net leases often fail to examine property taxes, but the survival of both may depend on reducing this cost.

  Other costs such as insurance and the enterprise software needed to run the business generally lie beyond a small business' control and do not diminish with reduced business volume. The active 2020 hurricane season certainly has not reduced insurance costs. During the pandemic, some landlords have deferred or forgiven rent, but this forbearance provides no long-term solution to the challenges e-commerce poses.

Mounting pressures

  The threat that high ad valorem taxes pose to pandemic battered small businesses is compounded by, and interrelated with, the e-commerce threat. Small businesses face enormous challenges in competing online with major brands such as Amazon and Wal-Mart, which command a far greater web presence than small mom-and-pop retailers.

  E-commerce's challenge to traditional retail will not end with the pandemic. The bulk of retail sales still occur in stores, with online purchases peaking in the second quarter of 2019 at just 16% of total U.S. retail sales, according to the Commerce Department. That percentage slowed to 14% in the third quarter.

  COVID-19 has accelerated the trend to "Buy Online, Pick Up In Store" (BOPIS). Pre-pandemic, BOPIS offerings were already growing as shoppers used it to avoid instore browsing time and shipping charges. A 2018 study reported 90% of surveyed online shoppers stated high shipping fees and home delivery longer than two days would likely deter them from completing an online purchase. Even before the pandemic, Amazon's rapid delivery model was pressuring conventional retailers to compete by accelerating shipping times.

  BOPIS allows retailers to blend online and in-store customer engagement while offering a more convenient way to shop. COVID-19 accelerated this trend as shoppers sought to minimize interpersonal contact during store visits. Retailers, however, need to be certain that applicable restrictive covenants permit BOPIS, since shopping centers often limit tenants' right to use common space. Further, traditional methods of valuing properties for tax purposes struggle to recognize and separate the intangible and untaxable value of web presence from the value of a physical location that serves as a pick-up point.

  Black Friday and Cyber Monday 2020 illustrate the evolving relationship between brick-and-mortar stores and e-commerce. RetailNext reported foot traffic to physical stores on Thanksgiving through the following Sunday decreased by 48% from 2019, while spending per customer increased more than 36%.

  Mall traffic tracker, Sensormatic Solutions, concluded that online ordering and social-distancing restrictions made shoppers more "purposeful" on their Black Friday trips. Adobe Analytics reported that Black Friday saw $9 billion in U.S. online sales, a nearly 22% increase year over year that made it the second-largest online spending day. Cyber Monday 2020 brought the largest shopping day in American history with $10.8 billion in volume, a 15.2% increase over 2019, Adobe reported. Adobe also noted that Black Friday curbside pickup increased 52% year over year.

Shared interests

  Landlords and tenants must recognize the mutual harm of high occupancy costs and guard against unwarranted property taxes as local governments seek to shore up their finances. Every nickel counts when retailers are under economic pressure just to keep their doors open. Years of remaining lease term is of cold comfort to a landlord whose tenant is forced to close by reduced revenue and high occupancy costs.

  Some short-sighted landlords ignore the property tax burden placed on their triple net tenants until a renewal is imminent since the landlord's costs are not directly impacted.  Where possible, a good lease on multitenant properties will address tax challenges and discourage taxes from being viewed as a mere pass-through expense. Further, prudent landlords should help reduce tax costs and avoid being forced to negotiate reduced rent to keep small businesses operating. Most leases do not include a provision permitting tenants to challenge ad valorem property taxes. Similarly, many state statutes only permit property owners, not tenants, to challenge taxes.

  Most assessors have not yet recognized COVID-19's impact on retail stores, primarily because the valuation date for most properties preceded the pandemic's full impact on retail. That will change in 2021 in many jurisdictions. Similarly, the trend toward BOPIS will increase the intangible value of online presence, generally not subject to ad valorem taxation, and decrease the importance of physical locations.

  COVID-19 is pressuring local governments to increase the property tax burden on small businesses. A recent survey found that municipal revenues are down 21% while expenses have increased 17% amid the pandemic. The survey reported 45% of mayors expect to see dramatic budget cuts for education, while at least one-third expect to see drastic cuts in parks and recreation, mass transit and roads. Only 36% of mayors expect to see a replacement of the businesses shuttered due to COVID-19.

  High property taxes will only exacerbate the municipal revenue problem. A short-term remedy to municipal finances, higher property taxes, risks the permanent closure of many small businesses and increase the burden on remaining brick-and-mortar retailers. Failing to address the problem will only accelerate the decline of physical stores and eliminate their local jobs and taxes.

COVID-19, wildfires and civil unrest all threatened property values and tax revenues in 2020, notes Foster Garvey attorney Cynthia Fraser.

Across America, 2020 transformed the urban core. Hotels sit vacant, deprived of business by travel that has been all but suspended. Restaurants under occupancy restrictions struggle to break even or have closed for good where winter weather precludes outdoor dining. In some locations, plywood sheets encase office and commercial buildings for protection against vandalism. In my own city of Portland, Ore., walking through parts of downtown is like walking through a ghost town of shuttered businesses that once teemed with commerce.

Suburban and rural properties have sustained similar impacts, while fires have ravaged many communities. With skyrocketing unemployment in many states, governments have set eviction moratoriums, and the number of tenants not paying rent continues to grow. Landlords may begin to file for bankruptcy protection in increasing numbers as their own bills—including property taxes—come due.

How long it takes for cities to bounce back from the events of 2020, and for property values to recover, will depend upon each community's economic vibrancy. Because property tax is a state tax, any relief from this tax burden depends upon each state's statutory date of value and whether its tax law contains a force majeure clause, which frees a party from a contract's obligations when an unforeseen event prevents their performing its terms.

MATTERS OF TIME

Most states value property as of Jan. 1 for taxes due later in the same year. Thus, in most jurisdictions a property's taxable value for the recent tax year reflects what was known or could have been known about the property and market conditions as of Jan. 1, 2020.

Lockdown for COVID-19 did not begin in most states until March 2020. The fires that devastated forests, agricultural land and communities across that nation took place over the summer and fall. No crystal ball predicted these events, nor the catastrophic fallout and snowballing impacts on property values.

Many contracts contain force majeure clauses. In most states, a force majeure law provides an adjustment to the market value for property taxes when there was a catastrophic event that destroyed or damaged property during the tax year. These statutes typically provide for an adjustment based on the event's timing, and in most states recognizing force majeure, it is critical to appropriately report the property damages to receive this retrospective reduction in taxable property value.

Some states, including Oregon, have passed legislation extending the deadline to report property damage from fire that will allow for a reduced real market value for a portion of the tax year.

Force majeure laws do not typically recognize a decline in property value due to a pandemic or the economic effects of boarded-up city blocks. Any records tracking the decline of property values will help taxpayers address novel valuation issues for this coming tax cycle. The long-term effects of these economic forces will weigh on property values for years and to varying degrees.

PREPARE TO PROTEST

Assessors will vigorously fight the taxpayer's request for a reduction in taxable value when their coffers are already low due to the loss of other tax revenues. For apartment landlords, it will be important to track nonpaying tenants, particularly in the states and cities that have enacted laws preventing evictions for nonpayment of rents. Retail landlords should track local market conditions and news of business closures that result in stores and restaurants going vacant, as that information will be important in supporting tax appeals this coming year.

Perhaps the largest unknown in the market is what will happen to the office sector. Office workers the world over have adapted to remote working. Zoom, Microsoft Teams or Webex have replaced conferences and board meetings, client visits and even many court hearings. The need to live close to a downtown office, or even in the same city, has diminished. Businesses are rethinking the need to staff their offices full time, and workers may be reluctant to commute to an office when they can effectively do their job at home.

Multiple factors will shape the real market value of properties this coming year. In 2020, taxpayers may have struggled to pay or protested tax liabilities that were based on values and valuation dates which preceded the crises that were to come that year.

By contrast, the uncertainties of the pandemic and its economic fallout will be tied to what is known as of Jan. 1, 2021. Property values across the nation will surely be affected, and this time around, taxpayers will be able to appeal assessments that fail to reflect the detrimental effects that many of the past year's events have inflicted upon their property's market value. Be sure to have the facts, figures and experts to deliver this information lined up in order to achieve a successful property tax appeal.

Owners in North Carolina must satisfy legal tests in arguments for reduced taxable valuations.

   Notice of a commercial property's revaluation to an increased taxable value can deliver a shock to the taxpayer. Although actual tax liability will depend on the completed valuation, new budgets and a tax rate that is still to be set, the taxpayer fears that an inflated value will result in an unfairly high property tax bill.
The typical taxpayer response is to assert the new value is too high, particularly for the larger assessment increases. The assertion alone, however, is not enough to change the valuation. While many jurisdictions have different burden of proof statutes, under North Carolina law, the onus is on taxpayers to prove specific criteria meriting a reduced assessment.
   Unfortunately, the state's valuation practices set the stage for assessor mistakes and inaccurate valuations. Unlike many jurisdictions, North Carolina only requires that real property subject to taxation be revalued every eight years, although recently most counties have opted to revalue every four years. In light of dramatic property value swings over the past decade or two, however, these lengthy gaps between valuations often result in significant increases, with assessments spiking by as much
as 40 percent.
   Undertaking a county-wide real property revaluation is a behemoth project for any taxing authority. Countless hours of factual investigation, analysis, and number crunching go into the process. Those involved are performing a necessary public function and do their best to get it right.
   Given the scope of a revaluation, lawmakers have set limitations to discourage taxpayers that simply disagree with the new assessment from demanding a full appeal and hearing based solely on the merits of the value. Aside from the time deadlines in the appeal process, a significant governor on the appeal process in North Carolina is the burden of proof.

Proof vs. persuasion
    In North Carolina, tax assessments are presumed correct. The State Supreme Court spelled out this premise in a 1975 case involving AMP Inc.'s appeal of the taxable valuation assessed on inventory stored at a Greensboro facility.
    In finding that AMP failed to prove its case, the Court encapsulated the burden of proof when a taxpayer attempts
to rebut the presumed correctness of an assessment. This is a presumption of fact that may be rebutted by producing evidence that tends to show that both an arbitrary or illegal method of valuation was used and that the assessment substantially exceeded the true value of the property.
    A taxpayer appealing an assessment must come forward with evidence tending to show both of these conditions: that the method used to establish the assessed value was wrong, and that the value derived from that method was substantially greater than the true value (the assessed value was unreasonably high).
   The burden is not one of persuasion but one of production. In layman's terms, the burden is not to persuade the decision maker that the taxpayer's opinion of value is correct and the assessor's is wrong. Rather, the taxpayer must show simply that there is evidence both that the assessor used an incorrect method in its appraisal, and that the resulting value is substantially greater than it should be.
   Once the taxpayer has produced evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness, the burden of coming forward with evidence shifts to the county. The assessing entity must establish that its method did, in fact, produce true value; that the assessed value is not substantially higher than called for by the statutory formula; and that it is reasonable. The latter is a burden of persuasion, meaning the assessor must convince the decision maker that it applied a correct method and arrived at true value.
   The terms "arbitrary" and "illegal," which the Court used in AMP in referring to the taxpayer's burden of showing the assessor used an improper method, sound a bit harsher than they need be. The courts simply hold that a property valuation methodology is arbitrary or illegal if it fails to produce "true value" as defined by tax law in General Statute 105, Section 283. That section defines true value as meaning market value. Market value is the price estimated in terms of money at which the property would change hands between a willing and financially able buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or to sell and both having reasonable knowledge of all the uses to which the property is adapted and for which it is capable of being used."
    A variety of methods have been found to be illegal or arbitrary, such as failing to consider the effect of obsolescence in the face of testimony of obsolescence and relying only on the cost approach to value income-producing property. A tax professional will be knowledgeable of many other examples.
   Given the burdens inherent in challenging assessments, a taxpayer planning to appeal its assessed value needs to be prepared to assemble and present information supporting its value opinion. In addition, the taxpayer should obtain and understand the taxing authority's method of arriving at the assessed value, in order to challenge that method as may be appropriate.
   At the local level, taxpayers have traditionally focused arguments on value alone, but, as an appeal reaches higher levels, the burden can become a critical evidentiary obstacle to overcome. Failure to get over this initial hurdle can result in dismissal of the appeal without the actual assessed value being considered on its merits.

Here's what investors should know before buying or developing in the Steel City.

Over the past decade, Pittsburgh has been named the most livable city in the continental U.S., a hipster haven, a tech hub and other trendy titles. Publications laud the city's affordable housing stock in a stable real estate market, access to the arts in an established cultural community, and world-class healthcare and higher education that place the Steel City at the forefront of medicine and robotics.

This attention has drawn real estate investors to submarkets well beyond downtown Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle. Even in the midst of the pandemic and the economic uncertainty that has come with it, a surprising amount of new development has continued in the region.As investors from outside the region consider investing in this real estate market, they should be aware of idiosyncrasies and pitfalls lurking in Pennsylvania tax law.

Welcome, Stranger

As in most states, assessors in Pennsylvania cannot independently change a property's assessment upon its transfer. However, Pennsylvania lets local taxing districts appeal assessments and request value increases, which they often do following a sale. Locals call this the "welcome stranger" tax.

"One of the most common reactions I hear from our out-of-state clients who are new to this market is disbelief that school districts can appeal assessments," says Sharon F. DiPaolo, Esq., the managing partner of Siegel Jennings' Pennsylvania property tax practice. "Of course, in most states that's called a spot assessment, but in Pennsylvania it's just another appeal."

In fact, local school districts (which take the largest piece of the property tax pie) filed more assessment appeals than property owners in 2017-2019, according to The Allegheny Institute for Public Policy data. "The most difficult part for buyers is accurately estimating what is obviously a large part of a property's value equation," DiPaolo explains. "Buyers can budget for the legal costs of defending against an appeal by the government, but it's much harder to underwrite the real estate taxes when they can't know where the assessment will eventually be set. We have seen many investors choose not to enter this market because of the uncertainty."

Allegheny County in particular is unusual in that it has a March 31 assessment appeal deadline, and Pennsylvania uses the filing date as the effective date of value for assessment appeals.This means that properties already under appeal for 2020 should be valued as affected by the early fallout from COVID-19, and 2021 appeals will have to consider the pandemic's continuing impacts on property values.

Understanding the local legal landscape can help investors budget for potential risks, and thoughtfully structuring a deal can sometimes help reduce that risk. For instance, when appropriate, transferring a property's holding company rather than the property itself can avoid triggering an increase appeal.

Further, properly allocating a purchase price—either among multiple properties in a portfolio or among the different components of a going concern—can avoid misinterpretation of deeds and transfer tax statements by local taxing authorities. This also ensures Pittsburgh's 5% transfer tax is applied to the real estate only.

Net lease investors should also be aware that, while many states can be described as "fee simple" or "leased fee" jurisdictions, Pennsylvania is unique in that, in practice, its courts will usually tax a leased property according to whichever of those values yields greater taxes. Through a series of cases over 15 years, Pennsylvania's appellate courts have struggled to base a property's taxation on its "economic reality."

Currently, a property achieving above-market rent is assessed according to its leased fee value (which will be greater than the fee simple value), while a property with below-market rent will be taxed at its fee simple value (which will be greater than its leased fee value). Under this system, two physically identical properties within the same taxing district can be assessed at wildly different values.

Neighborhood Discrepancies

Anthony Barna, senior managing director of Integra Realty Resources Pittsburgh, cautions investors to vet property specifics. "People keep saying,'Pittsburgh's hot,' but it's not the whole region," he says. "It's not even the whole city."

While office vacancy in the CBD had reached a 10-year high even before the onset of the pandemic, some nearby neighborhoods including Oakland and the Strip District can barely satisfy demand. Similarly, new apartments in popular neighborhoods like Lawrenceville are stabilizing quickly at record rental rates, yet rents and occupancies in other neighborhoods remain flat.

"The lack of a significant population increase in the city, coupled with the large number of new residential units coming online, threatens the economic balance and risks an oversupply," Barna observes.

Even more fundamentally, Barna says "a lot of our neighborhoods don't yet have the infrastructure to actually support what someone might want to build." In fact, Amazon cited infrastructure concerns as a major factor in its decision to drop Pittsburgh as a final contender in its HQ2 search.

Similarly, developers should investigate available tax breaks, which vary by location. Frequently these come in the form of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) or Local Economic Revitalization Tax Assistance (LERTA). In 2019, Pittsburgh opened all neighborhoods to potential tax benefits for new developments that meet certain employment or affordability requirements.

Tammy Ribar, Esq., Director at Houston Harbaugh who concentrates her law practice in commercial real estate transactions, advises that additional opportunities are available through various government bodies and can entail program-specific deadlines. "I think the best advice I can give to buyers is to research and understand in advance what programs are available and be informed about applicable deadlines, so that a relatively easy opportunity for savings is not missed," says Ribar.

Based on the recent pace of construction throughout the city, many investors have clearly decided that Pittsburgh's anticipated rewards outweigh its risks. And as many have learned, working with knowledgeable locals during planning can help to avoid headaches – and create significant savings later.

Local and state governments are expected to see annual revenues decline by between 4.7 percent and 5.7 percent over the next three years, excluding fees to hospitals and higher education, according to Brookings. But most vital government functions continue, and soon, counties will assess property values to prepare property tax bills for 2021. They expect timely payment. They also should expect a flood of appeals to lower property values, says Linda Terrill, president of the American Property Tax Counsel and a partner with the Property Tax Law Group, who spoke with SCT contributing editor Joe Gose.

How do you anticipate 2021 property tax assessments unfolding?

The good assessors know that a decline is coming and will try to make some serious examinations to see whether they need to come in at a different number from the prior year. My cynical view is that when there is an increase in value, they're very quick to notice it but if it's a decrease, there's a lag before they notice it.

It sounds like you expect a lot of appeals. What can property owners do to prepare for one?

Planning is the key to everything. You need to find out the state requirements for when you can file and who can file to make it legal — some states require corporations to be represented by legal counsel, some don't – and you need to know the state's definition of market value. You also need to get ahead of the curve and begin interviewing professionals who can help you, especially appraisers, before all the good ones are representing others. It's best to find an appraiser that does property tax or condemnation work.

What is the most important element in an appeal?

The highest and best use analysis. A lot of appraisers would confess that they go into an analysis thinking that the current use is indeed the highest and best use, but I don't think they can assume that anymore. Property owners need to tell their appraisers to really do the work and math because as of Jan. 1, 2021, the highest and best use of a shopping mall charging $20 per square foot in rent might now be a fulfillment center charging $5 per square foot. Or maybe it's an adaptive reuse that includes converting part of the mall to office or adding apartments.

How might declining rental rates influence an appeal?

Shopping center owners can make a terrific argument that if they had to lease space on Jan. 1, 2021, the current contract rent would have no reflection at all on market rent. There are an awful lot of leases being renegotiated and amended that will have to be considered, even though they might not get done before Jan. 1. Property owners need to put a trail of paperwork together to tell a good story. That means keeping correspondence with tenants to show the back-and-forth of what's happening and whether or not they are staying.

Is there anything property owners can do to reset to a more appropriate value prior to an appeal?

The best bet is to see if you can work something out early, particularly if you're a shopping center that is historically a top provider of tax receipts in your jurisdiction. You might want to start talking to the county assessor now and see if you can get a better result when the values come out in 2021. I don't know of any assessor that wouldn't welcome the opportunity to have a legitimate discussion about what's happening and come to a number. Many states also have a local-level appeal that you go through before going to court or an administrative body. In either case, you may have to settle for something less than what you would like, but if it helps keep you afloat, then it's a good outcome.

How long does a typical appeals process take?

If you're in [my state of] Kansas and want a hearing in 2021, you're not going to get one anytime soon because we haven't had any in 2020 yet. Thousands of cases are backed up, and I think there are many states in a similar situation. Counties are going to want to hire more people to handle these cases, but at the same time, they're going to be laying off people because of budgets. For all those reasons, it's going be impossible to come to a resolution quickly.

​Cris K. O'Neall Esq. of Greenberg Traurig LLP discusses why multifamily property taxes are excessive and what taxpayers should do about it.

While COVID-19 has diminished value and property tax liability for all types of real property, it has been especially hard on multifamily housing owners.

State and local shelter-in-place orders that limited business operations have contributed to reduced rental income and vacancies for most commercial property types. In extreme cases, residents have gone out of business or into bankruptcy, eliminating revenues. Many owners have shuttered vacant commercial properties during the pandemic, which at least allowed them to curb spending on utilities and other operating costs.

Few multifamily owners have had that luxury. People still need a place to live, so they continue to occupy their apartments even though they may not be paying rent. As a result, many multifamily operations have lost revenue without reducing occupancy, exacerbating anemic rent collections by compelling landlords to pay operating expenses on fully occupied complexes.

THE PROBLEM: RESIDENTIAL EVICTION MORATORIUMS

In March, COVID-19 prompted the federal government and many states to declare emergencies; counties and cities immediately placed moratoriums on evictions of apartment dwellers for nonpayment of rent. California's experience was typical, with over 150 cities and nearly all metropolitan counties in the Bay Area and Southern California passing eviction moratoriums. Similar restrictions adopted throughout the nation prevented residential landlords from evicting residents for not paying rent.

The specter of millions of apartment dwellers forced from their homes remains very real. With over 45 million renter households in the U.S., the magnitude of potential evictions and the possibility of creating a huge homeless population overnight is staggering.

In August, Stout Risius Ross LLC estimated that 42.5 percent of renter households nationwide were unable to pay their rent and at risk of eviction due to the economic impact of COVID-19. Mississippi showed the highest percentage of renters in distress at 58.2 percent, while Vermont had the lowest at 20.0 percent. Percentages in the major states ranged from the low 30s to 50s.

MORATORIUMS EXTENDED

Many eviction moratorium ordinances either expired by June or were set to expire in early September. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention responded by issuing an order on Sept. 2 (85 FR 55292) that, prior to Jan. 1, 2021, courts must not evict renters for failure to pay rent. Two days prior to the CDC order, the California Legislature passed an emergency statute (AB 3088) prohibiting nonpayment evictions through March 31, 2021.

California's governor asserted the state's statute takes precedence over the CDC's order. The statute preempts similar county and city ordinances, and the CDC's order states that eviction moratoriums in states that provide greater health-care protections than the CDC calls for are to be applied in lieu of the CDC's order.

The CDC's order and California's new law set renter income thresholds, but only to require greater documentation of need due to COVID-19's effect on a household. In California, the threshold is $100,000 for individuals or 130 percent of the median income in the county.

Renters below these thresholds need only submit a short hardship declaration to their landlord. The CDC's order and California's statute do not absolve residents, who must pay back-rent by Jan. 31, 2021 (CDC), or March 31, 2021 (California). In addition, California requires residents by Jan. 31, 2021, to pay 25 percent of rent owed for September 2020 through January 2021.

EVICTION MORATORIUMS AND PROPERTY TAXES

The National Apartment Association in 2019 estimated 14 cents of every dollar of rent goes to property taxes. Property owners receive 9 cents, while 27 cents pays property operating expenses and 39 cents goes to the property's mortgage.

Obviously, if there is no rent being paid but properties are still being occupied, owners must continue to pay property taxes, operating expenses, and their mortgages (mortgage relief is generally only available, under the CARES Act, to small property owners or owners with government-backed mortgages).

How will these moratoriums affect multifamily property taxes? Whether residents will resume paying rents early next year is far from certain, and back rent may never be paid. These unknowns will affect what multifamily properties' taxable values should be in 2020 and what they will be in 2021.

County assessors generally value multifamily properties using an income approach, starting with gross income netted against operating expenses. Capitalizing that income indicates a value that is the basis for determining the amount of property tax owed. The capitalization rate is based in part on the anticipated risk associated with the property's ownership, or the likelihood the property will continue to generate income.

The difficulty with using the income approach right now is that gross income declined precipitously and remains depressed many months later while operating expenses continue unabated, and there is no assurance back rents will be paid in 2021. The result in many cases is negative net income, which implies negative values and lower property taxes. In addition, capitalization rates are difficult to forecast because no one knows when COVID-19 health restrictions and related eviction moratoriums will be lifted. This uncertainty increases capitalization rates which, in turn, lower property values.

APPEAL ASSESSMENTS NOW

Given the economic challenges confronting renters, any multifamily property is highly likely to have declined in value in the short term, and potentially for the next year or longer. While assessors have promised "to take a hard look" at values in 2021 to see if they should reduce values and lower taxes, whether they will do so remains to be seen.

In view of this, multifamily property owners and managers would do well to appeal their property tax bills this year or during the next available appeal season. This will help ensure tax assessments for this year and future years account for the damage COVID-19 eviction moratoriums have inflicted on multifamily property values.

Numbers of lawsuits remind taxpayers and assessors to exclude intangible assets from taxable real estate value.

A recent case involving a Disney Yacht and Beach Club Resort in Orange County, Florida demonstrates how significantly tax liability can differ when an assessor fails to exclude intangible assets. For Disney's property, the tax assessor's and Disney's valuation of the property differed by a whopping $127.8 billion.

Real estate taxes are ad valorem, or based on the value of the real property. And only on real property.

The precise definition of real property varies by jurisdiction but generally is "the physical land and appurtenances affixed to the land," which is to say the land and any site and building improvements, according The Appraisal of Real Estate, 14^th Edition.

Your real property tax assessment, then, should exclude the value of any non-real-estate assets. That includes tangible personal property like equipment, or intangible personal property like goodwill.

When real estate is closely linked to a business operation, such as a hotel, it can be difficult to separate business value from real estate value. If the business activity is subject to sales, payroll, franchise, or other commercial activity taxes, then the assessor's inclusion of business value in the property assessment results in impermissible double taxation.

In Singh vs. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US Inc., the county assessor appraised the Disney resort using the Rushmore method, which accounts for intangible business value by excluding franchise and management expenses from the calculation of the net income before capitalizing to indicate a property value.

Disney argued the Rushmore method did not adequately separate income from food, beverage, merchandise and services sold on the real estate, not generated by leasing the real estate itself. Disney also argued that the assessor included the value of other intangible assets like goodwill, an assembled workforce, and the Disney brand in the valuation.

The trial court did not rule on the propriety of the Rushmore method but found its application in this case violated Florida law. Referencing an earlier case involving a horse racing track (Metropolitan Dade County vs. Tropical Park Inc.), the court agreed with Disney that "[w]hile a property appraiser can assess value using rental income or income that an owner generates from allowing others to use the real property, the property appraiser cannot assess value using income from the taxpayer's operation of business on the real property."

The trial court decision was appealed to the district court (appeals court). The appeals court found the Rushmore method, not just its application, violated Florida law by failing to remove all intangible business value from the tax assessment. When the case returned to the trial court on another issue, the appeals court instructed that the Rushmore method should not be used to assess the property.

In deciding Disney, both courts found SHC Halfmoon Bay vs. County of San Mateo instructive. That case involved the Ritz Carlton Half Moon Bay Hotel in California. The California court had rejected the Rushmore method because it "failed to identify and exclude intangible assets" including an assembled workforce, leasehold interest in a parking lot, and contract rights with a golf course operator from the property tax assessment.

The Disney trial court also looked to the Tropical Park horse track case, where the tax assessment improperly included income generated from the business betting operation not the land use.

Similarly, in an Ohio case involving a horse racing facility, the state Supreme Court rejected a tax valuation that included the value of intangible personal property in the form of a video-lottery terminal license (VLT) valued at $50 million by the taxpayer's expert (Harrah's Ohio Acquisition Co. LLC vs. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision). The property had a casino and 128-acre horse racing facility including a racing track, barns, and grandstand.

The Ohio Court recognized that the VLT had significant value that should be excluded from the real property tax assessment. It rejected the argument that the license was not an intangible asset because it could not be separately transferred or retained. Looking at its prior decisions, the Court had recognized a non-transferable license could still be valuable to the current holder of that license, and that value should be exempt from real property taxation.

Experts continue to disagree about the best method to appraise assets with a significant intangible business value component.Nonetheless, these court cases underline again how important it is for your tax assessment to exclude intangible assets. With most commercial property owners facing onerous tax burdens based on pre-COVID-19 valuation dates, it is even more critical that intangible assets are removed from valuations for property tax purposes. Work closely with assessors, knowledgeable appraisers, and tax professionals to ensure you only pay real estate taxes on the value of your real estate.

Commercial property owners are a tempting target for cash-strapped governments dealing with fallout from COVID-19, writes Morris A. Ellison, a veteran commercial real estate attorney.

Macro impacts of the microscopic COVID-19 virus will subject the property tax system to unprecedented strains, raising the threat that local governments will turn to property tax increases as a panacea for their fiscal woes.

Local governments face formidable financial challenges. One article by Smart Cities Dive suggests that the crisis will blow "massive holes" in municipal budgets, with 96 percent of cities seeing shortfalls due to unanticipated revenue declines. The Washington Post reported that more than 2,100 U.S. cities expect budget shortfalls in 2020, with associated program cuts and staff reductions. The National League of Cities recently estimated that the public sector has lost over 1.5 million jobs since March. Governmental temptation to increase the tax burden on commercial properties will be difficult to resist.

Commercial property owners face similarly unprecedented challenges. Many owners of properties that traditionally served long-term uses for hospitality, retail, office and restaurant activities are now questioning whether those uses will continue. Many properties will need to be repurposed, but to what? Some owners are reportedly considering converting hotels to apartments, for example.

Property taxes are a major component of the costs landlords must examine in determining when and how to reopen. High property taxes, which are generally passed along to commercial tenants, will exacerbate those business' economic problems. While owners can influence some occupancy costs, others, such as taxes and insurance, are largely beyond their control.

RATES, DATES AND VALUES

Real estate taxes reflect both taxation rates and assessed values, but property tax appeals must focus on a property's value. Values hinge on key concepts such as valuation dates, capitalization rates, and highest and best use. The property tax system assumes that values change only gradually, often assessing a property's value by creating a fictitious sale between a willing buyer and seller on a statutorily defined valuation date.

With valuation dates set in the past, assessors tend to value through the rearview mirror. Looking to make a deal, investors, by contrast, look prospectively in deciding whether to buy or sell a property. These viewpoints can clash, particularly when events affecting value occur after the valuation date.

That is why the commercial property owners clamoring for immediate property tax reductions will likely be disappointed, at least until a tax year when their statutorily mandated valuation date postdates COVID-19's onset.

For example, if a taxpayer's bill is based on a fictional sale occurring on Dec. 31, 2019, before the black swan of COVID-19, the assessor is statutorily bound to value the property at its pre-pandemic value.

Some jurisdictions maintain a valuation date for years. That value may change substantially once the valuation date postdates early March 2020, but few state statutes will authorize revaluations based on COVID-19 as a "changed circumstance." A pre-COVID-19 valuation could therefore burden a property for years.

Like the systemic market downturn of 2008, the COVID-19 pandemic will create great uncertainty in capitalization rates, which reflect risk associated with a property's income. This will provide good fodder for argument in tax appeals. The difference this time may be the added uncertainty surrounding the highest and best uses of various commercial properties.

In negotiating a transaction involving income-producing properties, prudent parties analyze future trends. Looking forward, they would interpret weakening tenancy with heightened risk associated with occupancy, rent collections and overall tenant credit-worthiness. They would know that tenants' missed rent payments can lead owners to miss mortgage payments, which can lead to foreclosure.

Contrary to this real-world tendency to look ahead in a transaction, assessors have often assumed a property's highest and best use is its traditional or current use. Trends of working remotely, social distancing, and the rapid, dramatic shift to online retailing turn this assumption on its head.

OBSOLESCENCE ISSUES

Some businesses that closed during the pandemic, including many retailers, may never reopen. Anecdotal evidence of the market shift is manifold. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, analysts were describing the shift to online retail as "apocalyptic" for many brick-and-mortar stores. Seasoned retailers including Neiman Marcus, Pier 1 Imports and J. C. Penney have declared bankruptcy. Many hotels have only been able to meet debt service obligations by tapping heretofore sacrosanct capital reserves, and airline travel has fallen off a cliff. In April, CNBC estimated that 7.5 million small businesses may not reopen. UBS projects that 20 percent of American restaurants might close permanently.

Social distancing rules that reduce restaurants' serving capacity may remain in place indefinitely. Combined with the loss of clientele, such as office workers that no longer work nearby, these conditions could mean closures for low-margin restaurants. Increasing occupancy costs and revenue declines accompanied by increased taxes could tip the balance.

Office values have historically been less volatile than retail property values, but this may change with the move to remote work. Change will be less apparent where many tenants remain subject to long lease terms, but some form of remote working is likely here to stay, and this suggests office tenants may well need less or different space.

Will an office tenant renew its lease? If so, at what rate? And will the tenant downsize? A key indicator of a weakening market is when tenants with long terms remaining on leases sublet space. In a declining market, tax assessors seldom look behind historic income statements to consider these weaknesses, which should be a risk reflected in the capitalization rate.

DON'T DELAY TAX PLANNING

Retail, office, and hospitality property values almost certainly will decline, at least in the short run. For transactional and property-tax purposes, commercial property owners should examine carefully whether the property's "highest and best use" has changed. Local governments that ignore these market changes in an effort to generate short-term tax revenues may exacerbate their long-term revenue problems.

Smart property owners may be able to mitigate the fallout by focusing tax appeals on the concepts of valuation date and highest and best use. They should also note the uncertainty inherent in capitalization rates.

Tax appeals in 2020 may prove especially challenging for cash-strapped commercial taxpayers because statutorily mandated valuation dates likely predate COVID-19. However, the longer-term risk rests with local governments. If they ignore changes in highest and best uses, and if taxing authorities fail to account for the increased risk in capitalization rates, governments may unwittingly increase the pandemic's economic damage.

An evolving and imperfect system has increased property taxes for many commercial real estate owners.

If you own or manage real property in the District of Columbia and are wondering why your real estate tax bill has gone up in recent years, you are not alone. One common culprit is rising assessed value, but that may not be the main or only source of an increase.

A less obvious contributor may be a new, different, or incorrect tax rate. Since tax rates vary greatly depending on a property's use, staying diligent when it comes to your real estate's tax class and billed rate is critical.

The District of Columbia applies differing tax rates to residential, commercial, mixed-use, vacant and blighted properties. Why is this important? Because the classification can make a considerable difference in annual tax liability – even for two properties with identical assessment values.

For example, a multifamily complex assessed at $20 million incurs a tax liability of $170,000 per year while the same property, if designated as blighted, incurs an annual tax liability almost twelve times greater at $2 million. Therefore, the assessed value is just one piece of the puzzle.

Keeping a sharp eye on a property's tax bill for the accuracy of any tax rate changes is paramount. This requires knowledge of current rates, the taxpayers' legal obligations, and how to remedy or appeal any issues that arise.

New Rates for Commercial Property

Property owners in the District should be aware of a recent change to tax rates on commercial real estate. The Fiscal 2019 Budget Support Emergency Act increased rates for commercial properties starting with Tax Year 2019 bills.

Prior to the enactment of this legislation, the District taxed commercial properties with a blended rate of 1.65% for the first $3 million in assessed value and 1.85% for every dollar above $3 million. The new measure replaces the blended rate with a tiered system, taxing a commercial property at the rate corresponding to the level in which its assessed value falls. Those levels are:

Tier One, for properties assessed at $0 to $5 million, taxed entirely at 1.65%;

Tier Two, for properties assessed at $5 million to $10 million, taxed entirely at 1.77%; and

Tier Three, for properties assessed above $10 million, taxed entirely at 1.89%.

The residential tax rate for multifamily properties remained flat at 0.85%.

Mixed Use

The District of Columbia Code requires that real property be classified and taxed based upon use. Therefore, if a property has multiple uses, taxing entities must apply tax rates proportionally to the square footage of each use. However, it is ownership's legal obligation to annually report the property's uses by filing a Declaration of Mixed-Use form. Owners of properties with both residential and commercial portions should be hypersensitive to this issue.

The District typically mails the Declaration of Mixed-Use form to property owners in May, and the response is due 30 days thereafter. If the District fails to send a form to an owner, it is the owner's responsibility to request one. Remember, the owner must recertify the mixed-use asset each year. Failure to declare a property as mixed-use may result in the entire property including the residential portion being taxed at the commercial tax rate (up to 1.89%).

Vacant & Blighted Designation

If you have ever opened a property tax bill and faced a staggering 5% or 10% tax rate, congratulations, your property was taxed at one of the District's highest real estate tax rates.

Each year the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) and the Office of Tax and Revenue are charged with identifying and taxing vacant and blighted properties in the District. The D.C. Code defines vacant and blighted properties for this purpose, and there is a detailed process governing why and when DCRA may classify a property as vacant. Nonetheless, in each tax cycle DCRA wrongfully designates properties as vacant or blighted, so it is paramount that the taxpayer understands their appeal rights.

To successfully appeal a vacant property designation, an owner must comply with one of the specifically enumerated and highly technical exemptions. One such exemption applies if the property is actively undergoing renovation under a valid building permit. However, the taxpayer should consult with an attorney, as there may be other requirements to qualify for an exemption. An owner wishing to appeal this designation must file a Vacant Building Response form and provide all applicable supporting documentation to DCRA.

Moreover, an owner may appeal a property's blighted designation by demonstrating that the property is occupied or that it is not blighted. Since an appeal of a blighted designation requires a more detailed review of the condition of the property itself, photographic evidence must be used to supplement any documentation provided.

Fixing Erroneous Rates

When dealing with local government and statutory deadlines, time is not on the taxpayer's side. It is important that as soon as an error is identified, the property owner understands the next steps. In some situations, the D.C. code or official government correspondence will lay out the process precisely for the property owner, identifying the who, what, where, when, why and how's of appealing a property's tax designation. However, sometimes a taxpayer will receive a bill without explanation.

In both scenarios, it is best to consult with a local tax attorney.  These professionals have experience dealing with these issues, as well as with the corresponding governmental entities.  A knowledgeable counselor can be an invaluable resource to guide you through any tax issue.