Keeping in Touch
Many of you will remember that during our 2009 Legislative session, property reappraisal was an integral part of that session as the Legislature addressed the reappraisal process per the Montana Constitutional requirement as found in Article VIII. Article VIII requires a periodic reappraisal of property, in the interest of equal taxation, once every six years on all taxable real and personal property.
While the Legislature did their job as fairly and equitably as they could, there were some inequities that came out of that reappraisal process which brought about numerous bills this session which attempted to address problems with not just the reappraisal process but different aspects of property taxes as well. In fact, there were 49 bills introduced which constituents and Legislators wanted brought forth to address various concerns.
Out of those 49 property tax bills submitted, I thought I’d share a few of them with you that were considered, which included my House Bill (HB) 308, a Constitutional amendment for property tax valuation on acquisition value. HB 308, while it offered the most potential for addressing some of the ongoing concerns many of senior population face as years go by, was tabled March 25, after almost a month and a half of ongoing discussion.
HB 333 would have required the Department of Revenue (DOR), when developing reappraisal comparables to determine market value of residential property, to take into account bank repossessions and others sales in properties if those sales constituted more than 5% of the sales of residential property in a specific market area. HB 333 was sent to the Governor who recently employed an amendatory veto of the bill, placing a 20% threshold when considering bank repossessions which drastically raised the bar for considering this information. Unless it can be overridden by a significant number in the House and Senate, the bill will not pass.
HB 567 would have revised the property appraisal process by allowing an extended assessment review. It would change DOR’s rule by allowing taxpayers the right to file form AB-26 - a request for an informal review by a taxpayer who is dissatisfied with their assessment/appraisal - anytime during the 6 year reappraisal process rather than the 30 day limited time frame now provided in the DOR’s rules. This many of you will remember that during our 2009 Legislative session, property reappraisal was an integral part of that session as the Legislature addressed the reappraisal process per the Montana Constitutional requirement as found in Article VIII. Article VIII requires a periodic reappraisal of property, in the interest of equal taxation, once every six years on all taxable real and personal property.
While the Legislature did their job as fairly and equitably as they could, there were some inequities that came out of that reappraisal process which brought about numerous bills this session which attempted to address problems with not just the reappraisal process but different aspects of property taxes as well. In fact, there were 49 bills introduced which constituents and Legislators wanted brought forth to address various concerns.
Out of those 49 property tax bills submitted, I thought I’d share a few of them with you that were considered, which included my House Bill (HB) 308, a Constitutional amendment for property tax valuation on acquisition value. HB 308, while it offered the most potential for addressing some of the ongoing concerns many of senior population face as years go by, was tabled March 25, after almost a month and a half of ongoing discussion.
HB 333 would have required the Department of Revenue (DOR), when developing reappraisal comparables to determine market value of residential property, to take into account bank repossessions and others sales in properties if those sales constituted more than 5% of the sales of residential property in a specific market area. HB 333 was sent to the Governor who recently employed an amendatory veto of the bill, placing a 20% threshold when considering bank repossessions which drastically raised the bar for considering this information. Unless it can be overridden by a significant number in the House and Senate, the bill will not pass.
HB 567 would have revised the property appraisal process by allowing an extended assessment review. It would change DOR’s rule by allowing taxpayers the right to file form AB-26 - a request for an informal review by a taxpayer who is dissatisfied with their assessment/appraisal - anytime during the 6 year reappraisal process rather than the 30 day limited time frame now provided in the DOR’s rules. This bill was tabled in the Senate Taxation Committee. However, this provision has been amended into SB 295 that is still working its way through the process.
HB 595 would have required reappraisal of certain property every two years. If this option had been in place during the 2009 reappraisal process the downturn in the housing market would have been recognized in a timelier manner. Although the appraisal would not start till after the phase in is completed, the Department would have been required to start finding comparables this coming year in order to capture the decline in the market. While HB 595 passed out of the House Taxation Committee and passed by a large margin on the House Floor on second reading, it was referred to the House Appropriations Committee where it died because of its 1.8 million dollar fiscal note.
SB 295 revises the manner of appraising certain property for tax purposes. The bill has passed both the Senate and the House and is headed to the Governor for what we hope will be his stamp of approval. SB 295 sets up annual appeals for residents one time during the phase in period, a process which requires the DOR to give those taxpayers who are appealing a list of those comparables they used in determining the assessment/appraisal value. It requires the DOR to use the Uniformed Standards Professional Appraisal Practices rather than using international standards, further requires the DOR to correct erroneous errors in an area, even if only one error is found and not just for the appealing taxpayers property and it does not allow the DOR to raise values unless there is a structural difference in the property.
This 62nd Legislative Session is expected to end on or near April 21st and we’ll be headed back home to our families, friends and constituents where you can continue to “Keep in Touch” by contacting me regarding your questions and concerns via e-mail at pathd13@blackfoot.net, or by calling 827-4652 or by mail at P.O. Box 1151, Thompson Falls, Montana 59873.