ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Appellate Law Blogs -> North Carolina Appellate Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Appellate Law

: North Carolina Appellate Blog

COA Reverses Property Tax Commission and County For Formulaic Taxation of Business Personal Property

By Sean E. Andrussier

ADVERTISEMENTS
In In the Matter of IBM Credit Corp., the COA reversed the Property Tax Commission for signing off on Durham County's formulaic application of a schedule for valuing millions of dollars in computer equipment. Instead, the COA ruled, the County and Commission should have taken into account functional and market obsolescence in determining the equipment's value.

Durham County valued IBM's equipment according to a form schedule, U5, which was developed by the Department of Revenue and ascribed a 5-year life to computer equipment. The County's proper application of U5 was enough to get to a presumption of correctness.

But IBM rebutted the presumption, with, among other things, expert testimony on the computer market and values. IBM showed what I know to be true as I write on my 4-year-old, worth-nothing Mac -- that rapid technological changes in computers cause quick decreases in computer equipment's market value.

The burden then shifted to the County to show that its calculation method did in fact get to the equipment's true value. The County failed to meet that burden, and the Property Tax Commission, in upholding the County's valuation, failed to address key issues (i.e., what is the market value of the property being appraised) and failed to support its conclusions.

The COA noted that the Commission posited that the U5 is legal, used by all of NC's 100 counties, and was applied correctly by the County here. But a tax appeal is not simply a matter of determining whether the right government schedule was used. The COA therefore reversed and remanded, sending the case back to the Commission to get to a correct valuation.

Full post as published by North Carolina Appellate Blog on December 08, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 11/03/26 02:34:35)