Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
The “Burden of Proof” In PTC Hearings Steve Pelfrey Property Valuation Specialist II Property Tax Section Local Government Division, NCDOR 2014 Advanced Seminars. The Issue.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
In PTC Hearings
Property Valuation Specialist II
Property Tax Section
Local Government Division, NCDOR
2014 Advanced Seminars
“The Members of the [Board] are public officers, and the Board’s official acts are presumed to be made in good faith and in compliance with law. “
“The burden is upon the party asserting otherwise to overcome such presumptions by competent evidence to the contrary….It is only when the actions of the Board are found to be arbitrary and capricious that courts will interfere with tax assessments.”
and then went on to say that the taxpayer had to demonstrate both an arbitrary or illegal method by the Board, and that the Board’s assessment substantially exceeded true value
“All presumptions are in favor of the correctness of tax assessments. The good faith of tax assessors and the validity of their actions are presumed.”
“The purpose underlying this presumption of correctness arises out of the obvious futility of allowing a taxpayer to fix the final value of his property for ad valorem taxation….If the presumption did not attach, then every taxpayer would have unlimited freedom to challenge the valuation placed on his property, regardless of the merit of such challenge.”
“When a taxpayer has rebutted the presumption…as appellants have here, the burden then shifts to the county to demonstrate …that the values determined in the revaluation process were not substantially higher than that called for by the statutory formula, and the county must demonstrate the reasonableness of its valuation ‘by competent, material, and substantial evidence’”
“When the Railroads offered evidence that the appraisal methods used by the Department would not produce true values for the Railroads, and that the values actually produced were substantially in excess of true value, they rebutted the presumption of correctness. The burden of going forward with evidence and of persuasion…then rested with the Department.”
“specific findings of fact and conclusions of law explaining how it weighed the evidence to reach its conclusions using the burden-shifting framework articulated above and in this Court’s previous decisions.” (Emphasis added)