Bushmann, LLC v. Bartholomew Cnty. Assessor
| Citation | 187 N.E.3d 355 |
| Decision Date | 08 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 21T-TA-00027 |
| Parties | BUSHMANN, LLC, Petitioner, v. BARTHOLOMEW COUNTY ASSESSOR, Respondent. |
| Court | Indiana Tax Court |
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER: MELISSA G. MICHIE, TAX CONSULTANTS, INC., Columbus, IN
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: MARILYN S. MEIGHEN, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Carmel, IN, BRIAN A. CUSIMANO, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Indianapolis, IN
Bushmann, LLC challenges the Indiana Board of Tax Review's final determination that its appeals for a correction of error for the 2016 through 2018 tax years were not timely filed. Upon review, the Court reverses the Indiana Board's final determination.
During the years at issue, Bushmann owned a 61,855 square foot parcel of land in Columbus, Indiana. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 48-53.) A convenience store and gas station were situated on the land. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 48-53.) In both 2016 and 2017, the property was assigned a total assessed value of $1,266,500 ($804,100 for land and $462,400 for improvements). (Cert. Admin. R. at 50, 52, 142.) In 2018, however, the property's assessment increased to $1,472,500 ($999,000 for land and $473,500 for improvements). (Cert. Admin. R. at 48, 142.)
Believing that its 2018 land assessment was incorrect, Buschmann filed an appeal on September 3, 2019, seeking to correct "[a] clerical, mathematical, or typographical mistake." (Cert. Admin. R. at 18 - 19.) On January 7, 2020, Bushmann filed two additional appeals for a correction of error, alleging that its 2016 and 2017 land assessments were also the result of "[a] clerical, mathematical, or typographical mistake." (See Cert. Admin. R. at 5 - 6, 11 - 12.) That same day, the Bartholomew County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals ("PTABOA") conducted a hearing on all three appeals. (Cert. Admin. R. at 4, 10, 17.) The following week, the PTABOA denied Bushmann's appeals. (See, e.g., Cert. Admin. R. at 3 - 4.)
On February 18, 2020, Bushmann sought review with the Indiana Board, electing to have its appeals heard pursuant to the Indiana Board's small claims procedures. (See, e.g., Cert. Admin. R. at 1 - 2.) On February 23, 2021, the Indiana Board conducted a hearing on all three appeals during which Bushmann claimed (via its tax representative) that its 2016 through 2018 land assessments were incorrect because the Bartholomew County Assessor did not apply the base rate as set forth in the county's land order1 to value the land. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 141-43.) Bushmann maintained that the county's land order established that its land was to be assessed at $10 per square foot for all three years, but instead its land was assessed at $13 per square foot in 2016 and 2017 and at $19 per square foot in 2018. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 143-48, 151-52.) To support its claim that its land was incorrectly assessed, Bushmann presented, among other things, a copy of an email that contained the county's purported land order. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 47, 144, 147.) Bushmann explained that to correct the math errors in its land assessments it simply multiplied the square footage of its land (i.e., 61,855) by the correct base rate (i.e., $10) and arrived at land assessments of $618,600 for the years at issue. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 145, 148, 150-51.) (See also Cert. Admin. R. at 47-53.)
In response, the Assessor asserted that Bushmann's appeals should be denied because she used the correct base rate to value its land during the years at issue. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 155-59.) The Assessor maintained that Bushmann's purported land order merely contained a proposed base rates of $10 rather than the actual base rate that was to be applied to its land during the years at issue. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 156-57.) In addition, the Assessor claimed that Bushmann filed the wrong type of appeals because the errors it was complaining about, i.e., whether the correct base rate was used to value its land, raised only subjective errors regarding the valuation of its land. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 157-59.)
On June 21, 2021, the Indiana Board issued a final determination finding that Bushmann's appeals for a correction of an error were untimely because even though it "checked the box indicating that it was alleging a clerical, mathematical, or typographical mistake," it was "fundamentally challenging the assessed value of its property." (Cert. Admin. R. at 138 ¶¶ 15-16.) As such, the Indiana Board explained that Bushmann should have filed its appeals within the 45-day statutory deadline for challenging its property's assessed value, not the extended three-year deadline applicable for challenging math errors. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 138-39 ¶¶ 15-24.) Consequently, the Indiana Board found that Bushmann's land assessments should remain at $804,100 for 2016 and 2017 and $999,000 for 2018. (See, e.g., Cert. Admin. R. at 140 ¶ 25.)
On July 29, 2021, Bushmann initiated this original tax appeal. After the matter was fully briefed on November 23, 2021, the Court took the case under advisement. Additional facts will be supplied when necessary.
The party seeking to reverse an Indiana Board final determination bears the burden of demonstrating its invalidity. Hatke v. Potter, 173 N.E.3d 728, 729 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2021). Thus, to prevail in its appeal, Bushmann must demonstrate to the Court that the Indiana Board's final determination is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; in excess of or short of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations; without observance of the procedure required by law; or unsupported by substantial or reliable evidence. See IND. CODE § 33-26-6-6(e)(1)-(5) (2022).
When Bushmann filed its three appeals for a correction of error with the PTABOA in 2019 and 2020, Indiana Code § 6-1.1-15-1.1(a) authorized taxpayers like Bushmann to initiate appeals of real property assessments by filing a written notice on a form designated by the Department of Local Government Finance with their township or county assessor. See IND. CODE § 6-1.1-15-1.1(a) (2019). (See also, e.g., Cert. Admin. R. at 5 - 6 (the "Taxpayer's Notice to Initiate an Appeal" ("Form 130")).) A taxpayer's appeal, with certain exceptions that do not apply in this case, could raise any claim of error related to the following:
See I.C. § 6-1.1-15-1.1(a), (e), (h).
The statute further provided that if a taxpayer appealed an assessment made before January 1, 2019, on the basis that there was an error in the assessed value of its property, the appeal must be filed any time after the assessing official's action, but not later than the earlier of:
I.C. § 6-1.1-15-1.1(b)(1). If, however, the taxpayer appealed its assessment based on one or more of the objective errors listed under Indiana Code § 6-1.1-15-1.1(a)(2)-(6), the appeal must be filed not later than three years after the taxes were first due. I.C. § 6-1.1-15-1.1(b). See also Square 74 Assocs. LLC, v. Marion Cnty. Assessor, 138 N.E.3d 336, 340 (Ind. Tax. Ct. 2019) (); IND. CODE § 6-1.1-22-9(a) (2016) ().
On appeal, Bushmann contends that the Indiana Board's final determination that its three correction of error appeals were filed untimely must be reversed given the Indiana Supreme Court's recent decision that the application of a base rate discount in a county land order was an objective error, not a subjective error regarding a property's assessed value. (See Pet'r Br. at 4-6 (citing Muir Woods Section One Ass'n, Inc. v. O'Connor, 172 N.E.3d 1205 (Ind. 2021) ).) Thus, Bushmann asks the Court to remand this matter to the Indiana Board to correct its land assessments by applying the required $10 base rate from the applicable county land order. (See Pet'r Br. at 6-8.)
The Assessor, on the other hand, claims that Bushmann's reliance on Muir Woods is misplaced because that case "does not give taxpayers the opportunity to argue about any wrong perceived to have occurred [in a land assessment] simply because a land order is part of the argument." (Resp't Br. at 10-11.) The Assessor explains that Muir Woods upholds all the caselaw that required taxpayers, like Bushmann, to follow the shorter appeal deadline when challenging nothing more than assessment methodology. (See Resp't Br. at 10-12.) Moreover, the Assessor claims that even if Bushmann's appeals were timely filed, Bushmann is not entitled to the relief it seeks because it merely provided the Indiana Board with a spreadsheet, not the actual Bartholomew County land order at issue. (See Resp't Br. at 11, 13-15.)
In Muir Woods, the Indiana Supreme Court evaluated whether the claim that an assessor failed to apply a certain base rate discount when calculating the assessed value of common area land was on objective error that could be raised under the former Form 133 correction of error process. See Muir Woods Section One Ass'n, 172 N.E.3d at 1206. The Indiana Supreme Court explained that when the Form 133 appeal process was in use, it "could only be used to remedy ‘errors which can be corrected without...
To continue reading
Request your trial