Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Revaluation Process <br />If the BOCC chooses to delay the revaluation until January 1, 2017, this would allow enough <br />time for the tax office to perform a full list and measure revaluation. To ensure the accuracy of <br />tax records, a full list and measure revaluation should occur every third to fourth revaluation, <br />depending on the frequency of the county's revaluation cycle. Orange County has not had a full <br />list and measure in recent history. <br />In preparation for the 2015 revaluation, staff conducted a random sample of 100 properties <br />throughout Orange County. Inaccuracies were present. Correcting inaccurate records will <br />improve the quality of Orange County's next revaluation, and it will ensure that all taxpayers pay <br />an equitable portion of property tax. <br />Should inaccuracies be discovered during the process leading up to the county's proposed 2017 <br />revaluation, those changes would take effect January 1, 2017. This is suggested to maintain <br />equity among taxpayers, and it is standard practice. This approach works best because it takes a <br />significant amount of time to work through the entire county and check tax records. All records <br />would be keyed into the system in late -2016 with an effective date of January 1, 2017. Any <br />resulting change in tax assessment would take place with the revaluation date. <br />The North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS), specifically 105 -381, allow a refund of taxes for <br />only three instances: <br />1. A tax imposed through clerical errors; <br />2. An illegal tax; <br />3. A tax levied for an illegal purpose. <br />Much debate centers on taxpayers that may have been taxed for an area or square footage that <br />did not exist. For example, a taxpayer may have been taxed for a finished bonus room that <br />actually was unfinished or for a finished basement that actually was unfinished. Chris <br />McLaughlin at the UNC School of Government opines that such situations are not legally <br />refundable. In his opinion, these are deemed appraisal judgments and fit neither of the three <br />refund options. Should a taxpayer be taxed on a house or structure, however, that did not exist, <br />that would be refundable under an illegal tax. The line appears to be that a refund may be issued <br />when a taxpayer is taxed on a structure that does not exist, but when the quality, individual <br />features or property characteristics are inaccurate, Mr. McLaughlin holds that the taxpayer has <br />the opportunity to appeal these each year during the appeals process. The NC Department of <br />Revenue takes a position that the statute is unclear regarding these instances. <br />One reason it may be impractical to refund for such occurrences is that an appraisal is one's <br />opinion of value. Different appraisers can form different opinions of value, albeit supported by <br />market data, and different appraisers may even measure square footage to be slightly different. <br />Because of this, the NC Real Estate Commission considers any differences less than 5% <br />