Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: Property Tax Valuation

It’s Property Tax Valuation time, again!

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

The Finney Law Firm has an extensive practice in property tax valuation work, assisting property owners in correcting the valuation of over-assessed properties in Ohio by the County Auditor and in Kentucky by the Property Valuation Administrator.  Since its founding, this firm has filed and won (or advantageously settled) more than 300 such Complaints, including for major corporate clients as well as small investors and individual homeowners.

We can either charge for this work at our standard hourly rate (plus expenses) or on creative contingent fee and fixed fee formulations.

This year, the Warren County Auditor has re-assessed all parcels in that County, and since this is the first year of the tri-ennial cycle, every property owner there has the right to challenge that valuation. We are in the second year of that cycle in Hamilton, Clermont and Butler Counties.

Read here about this year’s Property Tax Valuation class before the Cincinnati Area Board of Realtors.

Finally, watch here the on-line video wherein Attorney Chris Finney shares with you the step-by-step method you can appeal a tax valuation in Ohio on your own.

Are you entitled to a refund on Indian Hill School District Class Action Settlement? Here are the details

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on
This firm was privileged to serve as class action co-counsel along with Maurice Thompson of the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law and Paul DeMarco of the Cincinnati firm of Markovits, Stock and DeMarco in securing a refund of illegally-collected taxes levied by the Indian Hill School District for 2010 through 2014.  That legal team has settled claims for our clients relating to the over-assessment and payment of taxes totaling $5.5 million.
A recent article in the Cincinnati Enquirer about the law suit (Sanborn v. Indian Hill Local School District) and the settlement are here.
In the Spring of 2016, class members should be receiving notices from the Settlement Administrator about how to obtain their refund.  Taxpayers must respond in order to get their refund check.
  • PLEASE NOTE: If you or someone you know owned property in the Indian Hill School District for those years and have since sold the property, the Auditor’s Office, and therefore the Settlement Administrator, may not have your address and you may not be notified of your right to receive a refund.  In order to obtain notices about the refund, please be sure to contact the Settlement Administrator noted below and provide the following information: (a) your name and address, (b) the property you owned, and (c) the period you owned the property.
The class includes every property owner who paid the illegal levy for the years in question and includes both residential and commercial property owners.  The amount of the refund will vary by property and payor, but we estimate the average refund will exceed $800.
Here is what is going to transpire on this settlement:
    1. The court-appointed Settlement Administrator will send a letter to every class member who can be identified in the Spring.
    2. The Settlement Administrator will have calculated the pro-rata share of refund due to each taxpayer, which amount will be included in each notice.
    3. The recipients of the letters must respond to receive their refund.  They can also opt to donate the monies to the Indian Hills Public Schools Foundation.
    4. If payors of tax bills cannot be identified, or if they fail to respond, their pro-rata share of their refund will be paid to the Indian Hills Public Schools Foundation.
    5. Inquiries should be sent to the Settlement Administrator:
Dr. Harvey Rosen, Ph.D.
Burke, Rosen & Associates
2800 Euclid Ave., Suite 300
Cleveland, OH 44115
(216) 566-9300
Settlement@Indianhillsettlement.com
There is also a web site about the settlement: IndianHillSettlement.Com.
If you have any questions, please give Chris Finney of this office a call at 513-943-6655 or email him at Chris@FinneyLawFirm.Com.

Advocating in the halls of government: Indian Hill class action settlement approved by Judge Steve Martin

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

For those readers following the Indian Hill School District class action litigation (read here for more), yesterday, Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Steve Martin approved the global settlement.  This is good news for all involved, as a six-year legal battle has now wound to a successful end.

Today’s Cincinnati Enquirer has an update here.

We will run a blog entry next week with specific instructions on how those who now or during the class action period did own property in Indian Hill can obtain refunds.  The average refund will be around $800.

Finney Law Firm represents Plaintiffs in Indian Hill Schools property tax class action settlement

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

Christopher P. Finney has been pleased to serve as one of three attorneys in the case of Fred Sanborn et al v. The Board of Education of the Indian Hill Exempted Village School District, et al..  This case is featured in a thorough analysis in today’s Cincinnati Enquirer.

As the story relates, the case is in part about the tremendous persistence of an 87-year old lead Plaintiff, Fred Sanborn, who doggedly researched and pursued the reversal of an illegal tax exacted by the Indian Hill School District and in part about the creative legal skills of Maurice Thompson and the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law.

The Finney Law Firm entered the case after the Ohio Supreme Court victory was secured, in a second action that ended up before Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Steve Martin to certify the class of taxpayers deserving a refund and to process the refund of the illegal-collected monies from the School District.  Paul DeMarco of Markovitz, Stock and DeMarco provided invaluable assistance in the class action proceeding as well.

The initial question before the Ohio Supreme Court addressed a statute that allows a school district to raise additional revenue without a vote of the people in limited circumstances there the revenue was “clearly required.”  Cynically, the Indian Hill School Board in 2009 attempted to effectuate the tax hike even though they held a $24 million surplus at the time.  Thompson and the 1851 Center argued that either the words in the statute have meaning in restraining the discretion of the School Board, or they do not.  The Supreme Court decided that the statute had real teeth and determined that the School Board’s enactment of the tax was illegal.

The victory will result in a handsome tax refund for current and former property owners in the Indian Hill School District, but also stands as important precedent that clips the wings of Ohio School Boards seeking an un-voted tax increase that is not “clearly required.”  Boards of Education in Ohio are no longer able to ignore the clear language of the statute narrowly limiting the discretion to enact such a tax.

Additionally, Thompson had the prescience six years ago to concurrently commence a second action in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court to certify a class for purposes of fulfilling complex statutory requirements that would secure taxpayer rights to a refund upon the completion of the Supreme Court proceeding.  This was required because Ohio law is fairly hostile to taxpayers seeking retroactive refund of taxes, even those that clearly are illegal.  These dual suits show the incredibly sophisticated legal battlefield, filled with landmines, that Plaintiffs faced.

This saga is really an heroic tale of both dogged citizen activism and enormous legal talent, mostly by Thompson and 1851.  We are proud to have played a small part in this important victory for taxpayers.

The advantages of a full-service law firm coupled with a title insurance company

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

There are many law firms in greater Cincinnati, some special-purpose and some full-service, and there are many title insurance companies, commercial- and residential-focused.

But as a lender, as a consumer, as an investor, as a Realtor, what are the advantages to having a robust title insurance company coupled with a full-service law firm?  We think there are several.

  • First, from a real estate transactional perspective, we offer significant depth of experience and breadth of services to residential and commercial buyers and sellers, as well as lenders: closing and title services, leases, seller financing documents, and post-occupancy agreements.  We also can handle zoning and regulatory matters relating to your property.
  • Our litigators can vigorously litigate to enforce the contracts that we write and that you sign, or defend against such actions.
  • We can handle sophisticated matters relating to bankruptcy, probate administration, and the business components of a real estate transaction.
  • Finally, our property tax valuation team can assure you are not paying more in taxes than the law requires.

We strive to produce the same high-quality product and responsive customer service across each practice area of the Finney Law Firm and with Ivy Pointe Title.  We invite you to let us show you how we can “make a difference” in your real estate matters.

Ohio law changes on right to appeal after failure to appear at Board of Revision hearing

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

The scenario is as follows: A party files a formal appeal of his property’s tax valuation before one of Ohio’s 88 Boards of Revision and then fails to appear to prosecute his case.  It would seem automatic that the case is dismissed, and the complainant would have no right of appeal.

But Ohio is unique in that new evidence can be presented before the Board of tax Appeals following a win or loss at the Board of Revision.  It’s not exactly a trial de novo, but it’s close.

Thus, the question recently before the Ohio Supreme Court was whether a complainant in that circumstance has the right to appear before the Board of Tax Appeals to challenge the Board of Revision dismissal, and still seek a reduction in valuation.

Prior precedent of the Ohio Supreme Court said definitively “no.”  LCL Income Properties v. Rhodes, 1995.  However, as Court News Ohio reports here, the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision on July 2 in Ginter v. Auglaise County Board of Revision changes all that, and now the complainant will have a second bite at the apple at the Board of Tax Appeals.

Cincinnati Public Golf Courses Entitled to Property Tax Exemption

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

For five years, the issue has been percolating through the Ohio Department of Taxation and the Courts: When Cincinnati leased its municipal golf courses to Billy Casper Golf Management, did their real property become taxable?

The State Tax Commissioner said the property did become taxable.  The Board of Tax Appeals disagreed, and the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously agreed with the City of Cincinnati last week that the privatization agreement did not render the property taxable.

Court News of Ohio has the story here.

The decision, Joseph P. Testa, Tax Commissioner of Ohio v. City of Cincinnati, is here.

U.S. Supreme Court rules Maryland double taxation of income is unconstitutional

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that Maryland’s scheme of property taxation because it does not provide a full tax credit to residents for money earned outside the state.

We are presently analyzing this decision for application to our Ohio and Kentucky clients.

A Washington Post article on t he topic is here.

The decision, Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland  v. Wynne, et Ux., is here.

Ohio Supreme Court strikes “Games Played” method of assessing municipal income tax to professional athletes

Author By Christopher P. FinneyPosted on

The City of Cleveland assessed against professional athletes its municipal income tax using the “games played” method of taxation.

Under this calculation, the municipality took the athlete’s total annual compensation, times the municipal rate of taxation divided by the number of pre-season and regular games in the professional season for a per-game tax amount.  That number was then multiplied by the number of games the player played in the City each year.

Former Chicago Bears linebacker Hunter T. Hillenmeyer challenged that method of taxation for calendar years 2004, 2005 and 2006, in which he played one game each in the City of Cleveland.  In each of those years, he spent a total of two days in the City of Cleveland, but they tried to tax him 5% of his total earningson the basis of a 20-game season.

The Ohio Supreme Court sided with Hillenmeyer in finding that Cleveland’s “Games Played” method of calculating the taxes due violated his due process rights.

The decision is here.

 

 

 

Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT)

Author By Isaac T. HeintzPosted on

High-income taxpayers need to be aware of the Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT).  The NIIT is a tax passed in 2010 to help pay for the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. ObamaCare.  Below is a summary of the NIIT, and a few planning opportunities to consider to avoid/minimize NIIT.

The NIIT applies at a rate of 3.8% to certain net investment income of individuals, estates, and trusts that have income above certain thresholds.  The NIIT went into effect for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2013.

Individuals will owe the tax if they have Net Investment Income and also have modified adjusted gross income over the following thresholds:

Filing Status Threshold Amount
Married filing jointly $250,000
Married filing separately $125,000
Single $200,000
Head of household (with qualifying person) $200,000
Qualifying widow(er) with dependent child $250,000

 

At this time, the threshold amounts are not indexed for inflation.

In general, estates and trusts are subject to the NIIT if they have undistributed Net Investment Income and also have adjusted gross income over the dollar amount at which the highest tax bracket for an estate or trust begins (for tax year 2014, this threshold amount is $12,150).

In general, investment income includes, but is not limited to: interest, dividends, capital gains, rental and royalty income, non-qualified annuities, income from businesses involved in trading of financial instruments or commodities, and businesses that are passive activities to the taxpayer (meaning the taxpayer does not “materially participate” in the business).  To calculate your Net Investment Income, your investment income is reduced by certain expenses properly allocable to the income. 

To the extent that gains are not otherwise offset by capital losses, the following gains are examples of items taken into account in computing Net Investment Income: (i) gains from the sale of stocks, bonds, and mutual funds; (ii) capital gain distributions from mutual funds; (iii) gain from the sale of investment real estate (including gain from the sale of a second home that is not a primary residence); and (iv) gains from the sale of interests in partnerships and S corporations (to the extent the partner or shareholder was a passive owner). 

The NIIT does not apply to any amount of gain on the sale of a personal residence that is excluded from gross income for regular income tax purposes.

In order to arrive at Net Investment Income, Gross Investment Income (items described in items 7-11 above) is reduced by deductions that are properly allocable to items of Gross Investment Income.  Examples of deductions, a portion of which may be properly allocable to Gross Investment Income, include investment interest expense, investment advisory and brokerage fees, expenses related to rental and royalty income, tax preparation fees, fiduciary expenses (in the case of an estate or trust) and state and local income taxes.

Some planning opportunities to consider to help avoid/minimize the NIIT include: (i) receiving the purchase price from a sale of your closely held business or real estate over more than one year; (ii) generating losses to offset gains; (iii) renting property to your business; (iv) lending money to your business; and (v) take an active role in your closely held business.

1 … 5 6 7 8 9