Our Firm Our Practice Our People Insights News & Events Careers Contact
Photo for The Evaluator
Winter 2013

2012 Ohio Valuation Complaints Can Now be Filed; Contact Us for Your Complimentary Review

The period is now open for challenging your Ohio 2012 tax valuations.  Given the potential pitfalls and risks in challenging the tax assessment, property owners need to act now to review their assessments, determine the appropriate strategies and file a proper complaint before the deadline at the end of March. Read more.

BTA Reform Advocated by Ohio State Bar Association

Following the efforts of the Ohio State Bar Association (OSBA) Taxation Committee, currently chaired by Nicholas Ray of Vorys, the OSBA Council of Delegates has endorsed a slate of proposed reforms for the Ohio Board of Tax Appeals (BTA).  These reforms are focused on efforts to both improve the efficiency of the BTA while also addressing several areas of concern with the operation of the BTA. Read more.

Ohio Supreme Court and Legislative Update

  • The Court upheld the BTA’s reliance on a short-sale for determining value.  The Court expressly rejected the Board of Education’s argument that the fact that the sale price was less than what was owned on the mortgage should raise a presumption that the sales does not reflect market value.  The Court found that, while a short sale raises the question of distress and duress, the decision of whether such a sale is voluntary is a question of fact.  In this case, the BTA had before it sufficient evidence to establish that the sale was voluntary, that the buyer and seller were typically motivated, and that the lender sought to get the best price possible for the property. Read more.
  • The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the decision of the 8th District Court of Appeals and found that the failure of the Cuyahoga County Board of Revision to notify the property owner of an increase complaint within 30 days pursuant to 5715.19(B) could be cured by later notice. Read more.
  • School board failed to establish that it has won “race to the courthouse.”  It should have introduced “sender’s receipt” with time noted by postal service.  Even though all appeals were dismissed, the school board failed to establish that it could not protect its interests. Read more.
  • House Bill (HB) 510 addresses timing issues for implementation of valuation statute modified by HB 487. Legislation also clarifies application of revised statute to Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) property by legislatively adopting reasoning of Court in Woda Ivy Glen decision. Read more.

Ohio Board of Tax Appeals Decisions

  • Taxpayer’s appeal dismissed when taxpayer relies upon inaccurate information received from county employee about requirements to perfect appeal. Read more.
  • Second complaint filed in triennial dismissed, despite listing an enumerated exception on the complaint. Read more.
  • A second complaint in the same triennial is proper if the fiscal officer changes value. Read more.
  • Sale of property between related entities is not an arm’s-length sale where seller retains interest in purchasing entities. Read more.
  • Common property within condominium, separately parceled, to be valued at its unencumbered fee simple value. Read more.
  • Where receiver had express authority to contest real estate tax, complaint signed by receiver should not have been dismissed by the Board of Revision. Read more.
  • Statutory exception allowing a complaint dismissed due to unauthorized practice of law to be re-filed only applied to the initial year not subsequent years in the triennial. Read more.
  • BTA reaffirms that a Low Income Tax Credit (LIHTC) property must be valued by taking into account the use restrictions placed upon the property. Read more.
  • Despite finding evidence of property owner insufficient to justify reduction in value, BTA finds evidence submitted by Board of Education supportive of decrease. Read more.
  • BTA finds sale not probative of value when improvements added to property between date of sale and tax lien date. Read more.
  • Property owner failed to establish the value of personal property and goodwill it claimed was included in the purchase price. Read more.
  • BTA finds lack of probative and credible evidence in congregate care facility valuation, despite appraisal evidence presented by both the property owner and Board of Education. Read more.
  • Owner’s opinion of value submitted by legal counsel rejected; unclear who prepared the opinion. Read more.
  • Court-ordered bankruptcy sale could not be used to value the property. Read more.
  • Failure to state any requested value or amount of requested reduction resulted in dismissal of complaint. Read more.
  • Power-of-attorney failed to give daughter standing to file complaint on behalf of father. Read more.
  • Franklin County Board of Revision returns property enrolled in the Federal Wetland Reserve Program to the Current Agricultural Use Value program. Read more.

About Us

Our lawyers have significant experience in all aspects of state and local taxation. As a firm founded in Ohio, we are especially active in Ohio state local tax matters and have more Ohio-based state and local tax professionals that any other law firm in the state. Please click on the following links for more information on our state and local tax practice and specifically our real property tax practice.


Related Publications

The Evaluator - Fall 2012


Nicholas M.J. Ray

Scott J. Ziance

Steven L. Smiseck

Hilary J. Houston

Lauren M. Johnson

Anthony L. Ehler


This alert is for general information purposes and should not be regarded as legal advice. As always, please let us know if you want more information or have questions about how these developments apply to your situation.

IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: In order to ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any federal tax information contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another person, any transaction or other matter addressed herein.