Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
10 <br /> https://canons.so .unc.edu/zoi3/oz/when-does-an-appraisal-error-justify-a-refund/ <br /> not include errors in judgment or law on such issues as market value, quality of construction, or <br /> eligibility for a property tax exclusion. These types of non-clerical errors must be resolved through the <br /> annual appeal process and may not be corrected retroactively under G.S. 105-381. <br /> Applying the Ammons analysis to the five situations above, I don't think any qualifies for a refund due <br /> to clerical error. In each situation, the appraisal was that intended by the assessor. None of the <br /> situations involved an unintended appraisal—in each instance the assessor produced an appraisal that <br /> he/she thought was appropriate at the time. <br /> But clerical error is only one of two justifications for a property tax refund. Might any of the five <br /> situations above qualify as "illegal taxes"? <br /> Here's our court defines that term: "[G.S. 105-381] and our case law recognize a distinction between an <br /> erroneous tax and an illegal tax or invalid tax.An illegal or invalid tax results when the taxing body <br /> seeks to impose a tax without authority, as in cases where it is asserted that the rate is unconstitutional <br /> or that the subject is exempt from taxation." Redevelopment Comm. V. Guilford County, 274 N.C. 585 <br /> (1968). <br /> 1 think it's clear that situations 1 and 2 would constitute illegal taxes because the taxing unit had no <br /> authority to tax property not in its jurisdiction(situation 1) or that did not exist as of January 1 <br /> (situation 2). Similarly, situation 3 seems to be an illegal tax because a taxing unit has no authority to <br /> tax property that never existed. <br /> In contrast, situations 4 and 5 involve property that did exist in the taxing unit's jurisdiction as of the <br /> listing date but that received inflated appraisals. Is a tax on non-existent market value illegal and <br /> subject to a refund under G.S. 105-381? <br /> Not normally. In Kinro, Inc. a Randolph County, 108 N.C.App. 334 (1992),the court of appeals <br /> concluded without analysis that"over assessed values of personal property" do not constitute an illegal <br /> tax. If the taxpayers in situations 4 and 5 were complaining only of market value errors—let's say they <br /> Copyright©2009 to Present School of Government at the University of North Carolina. <br />