Title 1. Property Tax Code
Subtitle D. Appraisal and AssessmentChapter 25. Local Appraisal
Sec. 25.01. Preparation of Appraisal Records.
Sec. 25.011. Special Appraisal Records.
Sec. 25.02. Form and Content.
Sec. 25.025. Confidentiality of Certain Home Address Information.
Sec. 25.026. Confidentiality of Violence Shelter Center and Sexual Assault Program Address Information.
Sec. 25.03. Description.
Sec. 25.04. Separate Estates or Interests.
Sec. 25.05. Life Estates.
Sec. 25.06. Property Encumbered by Possessory or Security Interest.
Sec. 25.07. Leasehold and Other Possessory Interests in Exempt Property.
Sec. 25.08. Improvements.
Sec. 25.09. Condominiums and Planned Unit Developments.
Sec. 25.10. Standing Timber.
Sec. 25.11. Undivided Interests.
Sec. 25.12. Mineral Interest.
Sec. 25.13. Exempt Property Subject to Contract of Sale.
Sec. 25.135. Qualifying Trusts.
Sec. 25.14. Repealed.
Sec. 25.15. Repealed.
Sec. 25.16. Property Losing Exemption during Tax Year.
Sec. 25.17. Property Overlapping Taxing Unit Boundaries.
Sec. 25.18. Periodic Reappraisals.
Sec. 25.19. Notice of Appraised Value.
Sec. 25.195. Inspection by Property Owner.
Sec. 25.20. Access by Taxing Units.
Sec. 25.21. Omitted Property.
Sec. 25.22. Submission for Review and Protest.
Sec. 25.23. Supplemental Appraisal Records.
Sec. 25.24. Appraisal Roll.
Sec. 25.25. Correction of Appraisal Roll.(a) If the chief appraiser discovers that real property was omitted from an appraisal roll in any one of the five preceding years or that personal property was omitted from an appraisal roll in one of the two preceding years, he shall appraise the property as of January 1 of each year that it was omitted and enter the property and its appraised value in the appraisal records.
(b) The entry shall show that the appraisal is for property that was omitted from an appraisal roll in a prior year and shall indicate the year and the appraised value for each year.
Amended by 1981 Tex. Laws (1st C.S.), p. 161, ch. 13, Sec. 109; amended by 1991 Tex. Laws, p. 1417, ch. 367, Sec. 1, and 1991 Tex. Laws, p. 2891, ch. 836, Sec. 1.2.
Cross References:
Erroneously allowed exemptions, see Sec. 11.43(i).
Supplemental appraisal records, see Sec. 25.23.
Calculation of tax on omitted property, see Sec. 26.09.Notes:
The chief appraiser's duty to back access property omitted from the appraisal roll whenever an error is discovered is mandatory and not discretionary. A taxing unit may sue the chief appraiser who fails to perform this duty. Back assessment for an erroneously granted exemption is a current year tax, and it is not subject to a taxing unit filing a challenge in the tax year in question. Atascosa County v. Atascosa County Appraisal District, 990 S.W.2d 255 (Tex. 1999).
Notices of appraised value met Section 25.19 requirements and properly notified property owner of omitted property for the change in appraised value. The property owner should have been on notice of a tax change when he constructed a large improvement on property and his original property tax bill did not change, and the owner failed to introduce evidence that the tax notices had not been sent. Escamilla v. City of Laredo, 9 S.W.3d 416 (Tex. App. - San Antonio 1999, pet. denied).
A recent statutory amendment reducing the period for adding omitted property to the tax roll from ten years to five years was retroactive. An appraisal district may add improvements to the appraisal roll as omitted property even if the taxpayer had timely filed a rendition form describing the property. Harris County Appraisal District v. Reynolds/Texas, J.V., 884 S.W.2d 526 (Tex. App.-El Paso 1994, rehearing overruled).
Fraud by a taxpayer in its rendition of business personal property voided the appraisal district's initial assessment; thus, all of the property escaped taxation for the purposes of Sec. 25.21. Beck & Masten Pontiac-GMC, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal Dist., 830 S.W.2d 291 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1992, writ denied).
Building erroneously excluded from appraisal records could be added to the appraisal roll as omitted property, even though the appraisal records already listed a value for improvements. El Paso Central Appraisal District v. Montrose Partners, 754 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. App.-El Paso 1988, writ denied).
Property mistakenly granted an exemption from taxation under Sec. 11.01(d) could be back assessed as omitted property under provisions of Sec. 25.23. Friedrich Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Company v. Bexar Appraisal District, 762 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1988, no writ).
Where improvement was omitted, appraisal district had authority to add it to roll under this section, even though taxpayer had paid taxes on land. Cameron County Appraisal Review Board v. Creditbanc Savings Association, 763 S.W.2d 577 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi, 1988).
The fact that real property had not been assessed in prior years was a condition precedent for a back assessment. Yamini v. Gentle, 488 S.W.2d 839 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1972, writ ref'd n.r.e.).
A back assessment made without giving the taxpayer notice and an opportunity to be heard was void. Republic Ins. Co. v. Highland Park Independent School District, 171 S.W.2d 342 (Tex. Comm'n App. 1943).
A corporation that locates property omitted from the appraisal rolls may be organized, but no taxing unit may enter a contingent fee, tax ferret contract with the corporation. Op. Tex. Att'y Gen. No. JC-290 (2000).
Real property upon which ad valorem taxes were duly assessed and paid may not be back assessed on the ground that the land was undervalued for tax purposes. Op. Tex. Att'y Gen. No. C-781 (1966).
Sec. 25.22. Submission for Review and Protest.
(a) By May 15 or as soon thereafter as practicable, the chief appraiser shall submit the completed appraisal records to the appraisal review board for review and determination of protests. However, the chief appraiser may not submit the records until the chief appraiser has delivered the notices required by Subsection (d) of Section 11.45, Subsection (d) of Section 23.44, Subsection (d) of Section 23.57, Subsection (d) of Section 23.79, Subsection (d) of Section 23.85, Subsection (d) of Section 23.95, Subsection (d) of Section 23.9805, and Section 25.19.
(b) The chief appraiser shall make and subscribe an affidavit on the submission substantially as follows:
"I, ______________, (Chief Appraiser) for _____________ solemnly swear that I have made or caused to be made a diligent inquiry to ascertain all property in the district subject to appraisal by me and that I have included in the records all property that I am aware of at an appraised value determined as required by law."(c) The chief appraiser may require of his employees who are engaged in listing and appraising property an affidavit similar to his own.
Amended by 1981 Tex. Laws, p. 2359, ch. 581, Sec. 2; amended by 1981 Tex. Laws (1st C.S.), p. 161, ch. 13, Sec. 110; amended by 1985 Tex. Laws, p. 2497, ch. 312, Sec. 4; amended by 1989 Tex. Laws, p. 3599, ch. 796, Sec. 26; amended by 1999 Tex. Laws, p. 3195, ch. 631, Sec. 7.
Cross References:
Notice of denial or modified exemption application, see Sec. 11.45.
Notice of denial of agricultural use valuation, see Sec. 23.44(d).
Notice of denial of open-space designation, see Sec. 23.57(d).
Notice of denial of timber land designation, see Sec. 23.79(d).
Notice of denial of public access airport property designation, see Sec. 23.85.
Notice of denial of application for recreational, park, or scenic land designation, see Sec. 23.95(d).
Notice of denial of application for restricted-use timber land, see Sec. 23.9805(d).
Notice of increase in appraised value, see Sec. 25.19.
Review of records by review board, see ch. 41.
Suit to compel compliance with deadline, see Sec. 43.04.
Begin review in 10 days, see Sec. 6.42.Sec. 25.23. Supplemental Appraisal Records.
(a) After submission of appraisal records, the chief appraiser shall prepare supplemental appraisal records listing:
(1) each taxable property the chief appraiser discovers that is not included in the records already submitted, including property that was omitted from an appraisal roll in a prior tax year;
(2) property on which the appraisal review board has not determined a protest at the time of its approval of the appraisal records; and
(3) property that qualifies for an exemption under Section 11.13(n) that was adopted by the governing body of a taxing unit after the date the appraisal records were submitted.
(b) Supplemental appraisal records shall be in the form prescribed by the comptroller and shall include the items required by Section 25.02 of this code.
(c) As soon as practicable after determining the appraised value of a property listed in the supplemental appraisal records, the chief appraiser shall deliver the notice required by Section 25.19, if applicable, and submit the records for review and determination of protest as provided by Section 25.22.
(d) Supplemental appraisal records are subject to review, protest, and appeal as provided by Chapters 41 and 42 of this code. However, a property owner must file a notice of protest within 30 days after the date notice is delivered as required by Section 25.19. If a property owner files a notice of protest, the appraisal review board shall hear and determine the protest within 30 days after the filing of the protest or as soon thereafter as practicable. If a property owner does not file a protest within the protest deadline, the appraisal review board shall complete its review of the supplemental appraisal records within 30 days after the protest deadline or as soon thereafter as practicable.
(e) The chief appraiser shall add supplemental appraisal records, as changed by the appraisal review board and approved by that board, to the appraisal roll for the district and certify the addition to the taxing units.
Amended by 1981 Tex. Laws (1st C.S.), p. 162, ch. 13, Sec. 111; amended by 1983 Tex. Laws, p. 4945, ch. 884, Sec. 2; amended by 1989 Tex. Laws, p. 3599, ch. 796, Sec. 27; amended by 1991 Tex. Laws, p. 2891, ch. 836, Sec. 1.3; amended by 1991 Tex. Laws (2nd C.S.), p. 35, ch. 6, Sec. 43; amended by 1999 Tex. Laws, p. 4187, ch. 1199, Sec. 2.
Cross References:
Approval prohibited until substantially all protests completed, see Sec. 41.12.
Omitted property, see Sec. 25.21.
Percentage homestead exemption, see Sec. 11.13(n).
Changes to tax rolls, see Sec. 26.15.
Supplemental tax bills, see Sec. 26.15.
Listing of supplemental records, see Sec. 26.01(c).Notes:
Court does not have jurisdiction to hear appeal cancellation of 1-d-1 appraisal where taxpayer did not appeal within 10 days after notification and the appraisal review board had already approved the records. Dallas CAD v. Seven Investment Company and Dallas CAD v. Las Colinas Corporation, 813 S.W.2d 197 (Tex. App.- Dallas 1991), rev'd on other grounds 835 S.W.2d 75 (Tex. 1992).
Building erroneously excluded from appraisal records could be added to the appraisal roll as omitted property, even though the appraisal records already listed a value for improvements. El Paso Central Appraisal District v. Montrose Partners, 754 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. App.-El Paso 1988, writ denied).
Property mistakenly granted an exemption from taxation under Sec. 11.01(d) could be back assessed as omitted property under provisions of Sec. 25.23. Friedrich Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Company v. Bexar Appraisal District, 762 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1988, no writ).
Where improvement was omitted, appraisal district had authority to add it to roll under this section, even though taxpayer had paid taxes on land. Cameron County Appraisal Review Board v. Creditbanc Savings Association, 763 S.W.2d 577 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi, 1988, writ denied).
The appraisal records, as changed by order of the appraisal review board and approved by that board, constitute the appraisal roll for the district.
Amended by 1981 Tex. Laws (1st C.S.), p. 162, ch. 13, Sec. 112.
Cross References:
Approval prohibited until substantially all protests completed, see Sec. 41.12.
Appraisal records generally, see Sec. 25.02.Notes:
Under Property Tax Code Section 25.25(c)(3), the appraisal review board may not look past the actual appraisal roll to determine whether an error had actually occurred as to the "form of the property" as shown on that roll. The statutory meaning of "form of the property" concerns whether the property is correctly identified as real property, personal property, an improvement to real property or some other typical physical description of that property. A review board's previous actions in reviewing the actual physical condition of a business property was therefore incorrect. It was not relevant that the appraisal review board had used this methodology of review in the past to modify items other than what information was shown on the appraisal roll. Dallas Central Appraisal District v. G.T.E. Directories Corporation, 905 S.W. 2d 318 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1995, writ denied).
Sec. 25.25. Correction of Appraisal Roll.
(a) Except as provided by Chapters 41 and 42 of this code and by this section, the appraisal roll may not be changed.
(b) The chief appraiser may change the appraisal roll at any time to correct a name or address, a determination of ownership, a description of property, multiple appraisals of a property, or a clerical error or other inaccuracy as prescribed by board rule that does not increase the amount of tax liability. Before the 10th day after the end of each calendar quarter, the chief appraiser shall submit to the appraisal review board and to the board of directors of the appraisal district a written report of each change made under this subsection that decreases the tax liability of the owner of the property. The report must include:
(1) a description of each property; and
(2) the name of the owner of that property.
(c) The appraisal review board, on motion of the chief appraiser or of a property owner, may direct by written order changes in the appraisal roll for any of the five preceding years to correct:
(1) clerical errors that affect a property owner's liability for a tax imposed in that tax year;
(2) multiple appraisals of a property in that tax year; or
(3) the inclusion of property that does not exist in the form or at the location described in the appraisal roll.
(d) At any time prior to the date the taxes become delinquent, a property owner or the chief appraiser may file a motion with the appraisal review board to change the appraisal roll to correct an error that resulted in an incorrect appraised value for the owner's property. However, the error may not be corrected unless it resulted in an appraised value that exceeds by more than one-third the correct appraised value. If the appraisal roll is changed under this subsection, the property owner must pay to each affected taxing unit a late-correction penalty equal to 10 percent of the amount of taxes as calculated on the basis of the corrected appraised value. The roll may not be changed under this subsection if:
(1) the property was the subject of a protest brought by the property owner under Chapter 41, a hearing on the protest was conducted in which the property owner offered evidence or argument, and the appraisal review board made a determination of the protest on the merits; or
(2) the appraised value of the property was established as a result of a written agreement between the property owner or the owner's agent and the appraisal district.
(e) If the chief appraiser and the property owner do not agree to the correction before the 15th day after the date the motion is filed, a party bringing a motion under Subsection (c) or (d) is entitled on request to a hearing on and a determination of the motion by the appraisal review board. A party bringing a motion under this section must describe the error or errors that the motion is seeking to correct. Not later than 15 days before the date of the hearing, the board shall deliver written notice of the date, time, and place of the hearing to the chief appraiser, the property owner, and the presiding officer of the governing body of each taxing unit in which the property is located. The chief appraiser, the property owner, and each taxing unit are entitled to present evidence and argument at the hearing and to receive written notice of the board's determination of the motion. A property owner who files the motion must comply with the payment requirements of Section 42.08 or forfeit the right to a final determination of the motion.
(f) The chief appraiser shall certify each change made as provided by this section to the assessor for each unit affected by the change within five days after the date the change is entered.
(g) Within 45 days after receiving notice of the appraisal review board's determination of a motion under this section, the property owner or the chief appraiser may file suit to compel the board to order a change in the appraisal roll as required by this section.
(h) The appraisal review board, on the joint motion of the property owner and the chief appraiser filed at any time prior to the date the taxes become delinquent, shall by written order correct an error that resulted in an incorrect appraised value for the owner's property.
(i) A person who acquires property after January 1 of the tax year at issue is entitled to file any motion that this section authorizes the person who owned the property on January 1 of that year to file, if the deadline for filing the motion has not passed.
(j) If during the pendency of a motion under this section the ownership of property subject to the motion changes, the new owner of the property is entitled to proceed with the motion in the same manner as the property owner who filed the motion.
(k) The chief appraiser shall change the appraisal records and school district appraisal rolls promptly to reflect the detachment and annexation of property among school districts under Subchapter C or G, Chapter 41, Education Code.
(l) A motion may be filed under Subsection (c) regardless of whether, for a tax year to which the motion relates, the owner of the property protested under Chapter 41 an action relating to the value of the property that is the subject of the motion.
(m) The hearing on a motion under Subsection (c) or (d) shall be conducted in the manner provided by Subchapter C, Chapter 41.
(n) After a chief appraiser certifies a change under Subsection (b) that corrects multiple appraisals of a property, the liability of a taxing unit for a refund of taxes under Section 26.15(f), and any penalty or interest on those taxes, is limited to taxes paid for the tax year in which the appraisal roll is changed and the four tax years preceding that year.
(o) The failure or refusal of a chief appraiser to change an appraisal roll under Subsection (b) is not:
(1) an action that the appraisal review board is authorized to determine under this section;
(2) an action that may be the subject of a suit to compel filed under Subsection (g);
(3) an action that a property owner is entitled to protest under Section 41.41; or
(4) an action that may be appealed under Chapter 42.
Amended by 1981 Tex. Laws (1st C.S.), p. 162, ch. 13, Sec. 113; amended by 1985 Tex. Laws, p. 6158, ch. 826, Sec. 1; amended by 1989 Tex. Laws, p. 3599, ch. 796, Sec. 28, and p. 3787, ch. 829, Sec. 1; amended by 1991 Tex. Laws, p. 1417, ch. 367, Sec. 2, and p. 1505, ch. 393, Sec. 2; amended by 1993 Tex. Laws, p. 1528, ch. 347, Sec. 4.12 and by p. 4443, ch. 1031, Sec. 2; amended by 1995 Tex. Laws, p. 848, ch. 76, Sec. 17.01(48); amended by 1997 Tex. Laws, p. 373, ch. 165, Sec. 6.76; p. 1031, ch. 177, Sec. 1; and p. 3910, ch. 1039, Sec. 26; amended by 2001 Tex. Laws, p. 811, ch. 439, Sec. 1 and p. 4821, ch. 1430, Sec. 6.
HB 1500 (68th Leg., 1983) addressed tax roll corrections where full implementation of the appraisal district was delayed, such as in Harris County. The bill did not amend the Tax Code and provided the following:
(a) A tax roll prepared by the tax assessor for a taxing unit before the participation of the unit in an appraisal district and approved by the board of equalization or appraisal review board for the unit may be corrected as provided by this section. A change in the tax roll that affects the tax liability of a property owner is subject to Section 26.15(d), (e), or (f), Tax Code, as applicable.
(b) The tax assessor for the unit may change the tax roll at any time to correct a name or address, a description of property, or a clerical error that does not affect the amount of tax liability.
(c) At any time, the governing body of the taxing unit, on motion of the tax assessor for the unit or of a property owner, may direct by written order changes in the tax roll to correct:
(1) clerical errors that affect a property owner's liability for a tax;
(2) the tax liability of a property owner who has qualified for a residence homestead exemption for the tax year as provided by Section 11.431, Tax Code; or
(3) multiple appraisals of a property in a single year.
(d) The assessor for the unit shall enter on the tax roll the changes made as provided by this section.
Cross References:
Appeal to district court generally, see ch. 42.
Correction of tax roll, see Sec. 26.15.
Definition of clerical error, see Sec. 1.04 (18).
Payment of taxes under protest, see Sec. 42.08.
Protests generally, see ch. 41.
School annexation and detachment, see ch. 41, Education Code.Notes:
Taxpayer is able to use federal court bankruptcy proceedings to reappraise its property so long as the reappraisal is determined by using state court principles. Under Texas law, only grossly excessive values can be adjusted and the taxpayer must prove the excessive nature of the initial tax appraisal. The court cannot take into consideration conditions which arise after January 1 of the disputed tax year and/or any other factors which impact the taxpayer's actual distribution. Business value does not impact the actual value of the inventory held by that business. In Re: Quality Beverage Co., Inc., 170 Bankruptcy Reporter 310 (Southern District, Texas 1994).
Taxpayer failed to apply for an open-space land designation upon a request by the chief appraiser and protested under Section 25.25 as a clerical error concerning the date of conveyance of property. The appraisal review board held for the appraisal district. The order determining protest was not delivered to the taxpayer for more than four months due to an address change. The trial court held that the property qualified for an open-space land designation without the need for re-application. The Court upheld the ruling. Because administrative remedies were exhausted and the taxpayer filed suit within 45 days of receiving the order, the Court held that it had jurisdiction to decide the controlling issue in the case. Cooke County Tax Appraisal District v. Teel, No. 2-03-115-CV (Tex. App.-Fort Worth, 2003, no pet. h.).
An unadjudicated protest filed by a taxpayer does not bar a hearing pursuant to a motion for late correction under Section 25.25(d). Dismissal of a protest for failure to appear at a hearing is not an adjudication of the rights of the parties. The taxpayer was not entitled, however, to recover attorneys fees under Section 41.45 as a result of the denial of the hearing on the motion for late correction. Koger Equity, Inc. v. Bexar County Appraisal Review Board, 123 S.W.3d 502 (Tex. App.-San Antonio, 2003, no pet. h.).
Interstate allocation of business aircraft was not permitted as a late correction to an appraisal roll, as also held in decisions by the Harris County appellate courts. WB Summit Properties, Inc. v. Midland Central Appraisal District, 122 S.W.3d 374 (Tex. App.-El Paso 2003, no pet. h.).
Tax Code Section 21.055 implies that a taxpayer who seeks allocation of value must provide information showing entitlement to allocation at the time of rendition. Further, the Court cited Rule 9.4033(e): "a property owner who is entitled to an allocation of property must file a rendition form that provides enough information necessary to . . . permit the chief appraiser to apply an allocation formula. . ." The language in Section 25.25(c)(3) refers to property that does not have any physical location in Texas through the entire year. The section does not permit a change in the appraisal roll for interstate allocation of the value of personal property. The Court expressly overruled its prior decision in Himont U.S.A. Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District, 904 S.W.2d 740 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, no writ). Harris County Appraisal District v. Texas Gas Transmission Corp., 105 S.W.3d 88 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, pet. filed).
Failure of the taxpayer to show entitlement to interstate allocation for its aircraft at the time of rendition precluded the allocation. In addressing whether the aircraft was commercial rather than business in nature, it held that the aircraft's operator must be a "certified air carrier" for the commercial status to apply. SLW Aviation, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District, 105 S.W.3d 99 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).
Section 25.25(c)(3) does not provide a means to allocate the value of a business aircraft. Harris County Appraisal District v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 99 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. filed).
Section 25.25(c)(3) was not a proper remedy for the allocation of aircraft value because the property owner stipulated that the aircraft existed at the location and in the form described on the appraisal roll. It could not use the allocation provision of Section 21.03 to prove that the aircraft was not located in the appraisal district to correct a prior year roll. By failing to file timely a protest, the taxpayer waived its right to allocation for prior years. Kellair Aviation Co. v. Travis Central Appraisal District, 99 S.W.3d 704 (Tex. App.-Austin 2003, pet. denied).
The taxpayer must follow statutory procedures for allocation of value to apply. The owner waived constitutional entitlement to interstate allocation by failing to protest before the appraisal review board. The aircraft was located in the district on January 1 of each year in question, and the taxpayer did not challenge the description of the property on the appraisal rolls. The aircraft value therefore could not be allocated for prior years. A & S Air Service, Inc. v. Denton Central Appraisal District, 99 S.W.3d 340 (Tex. App.-Ft. Worth 2003, no pet.).
The taxpayer exhausted its administrative remedies by protesting to the appraisal review board the inclusion of certain vehicles in the appraised value of a property account. The taxpayer therefore could raise the defense of non-ownership in a suit to collect delinquent taxes, even though the appraisal protest was not continued in subsequent years. City of Pharr v. Boarder to Boarder Trucking Svc., Inc. 76 S.W.3d 803 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2002, pet. denied).
Section 25.25(c) was an improper method of seeking the commercial aircraft interstate allocation found in Section 21.05. As reasoned in the Texarkana court in Aramco Associated Co., the legislature has given property owners two specific procedures to challenge the appraised value on appraisal rolls under Chapters 41 and 42 and under Section 25.25(d). The legislature placed restrictions on the right to challenge the appraised value in both procedures. Broadly construing "location" to permit a challenge under Section 25.25(c)(3) to the allocation of appraised value would be contrary to the legislative scheme. Gunn v. Bexar County Appraisal District, 71 S.W.3d 425 (Tex. App. - San Antonio [4th Dist.] 2002, pet. denied).
Tax Code Section 25.25(c), subject to a five-year limitation, gives the appraisal review board the authority to change the appraisal roll on motion of the chief appraiser or a property owner. Section 25.25(b) does not contemplate the filing or presentation of any protest, or authorize the appraisal review board to review the chief appraiser's decision. Western Athletic Clubs, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District and Harris County Appraisal Review Board, 56 S.W.3d 269 (Tex. App. - Amarillo 2001, no pet.).
Section 25.25(d) does not provide for the appeal of the denial of an exemption. Taxpayer failed to timely file a protest under Chapter 41. Bexar Appraisal District v. Wackenhut Corrections Corporation, 52 S.W.3d 795 (Tex. App. - San Antonio 2001, no pet.).
The statutory language in Tax Code Section 25.25(d) provides that the tax roll could not be changed if the property was subject of a prior protest brought under Tax Code Chapter 41 and resolved by an earlier negotiated resolution. Royal Production Company, Inc. v. San Jacinto County Central Appraisal District and San Jacinto County Appraisal Review Board, 42 S.W.3d 373 (Tex. App. - Beaumont 2001, no pet.).
Because owners of agricultural land are informed of the appraised market value of their land in the notices of appraised value, they are sufficiently alerted to any error in the appraised market value at the time of the appraisal. Therefore, even though they are not taxed on the market value of their land, these owners have the right to protest the appraised market value immediately upon receiving their notice of appraised value, long before any rollback tax may be imposed because of a change in use. Any motion made pursuant to Section 25.25(d), including a motion to correct the appraised market value of agricultural property, must be filed before the date the yearly property taxes - not the rollback taxes - on the subject land become delinquent. Tarrant Appraisal District and Tarrant Appraisal Review Board v. Gateway Center Associates, Ltd., 34 S.W.3d 712 (Tex. App.- Fort Worth [2nd Dist.] 2000, no pet.).
Taxpayer sought relief under Section 25.25 regarding the value of an airplane for 1991 through 1995. 1991 and 1992 were not properly before the court since protests were filed, but dismissed when taxpayer did not appear for the hearing. 1994 and 1995 were not properly before the court either since protests were filed and written settlements executed. No protest was pursued for 1993. However, since the parties stipulated to the form and location of the airplane as described in the appraisal, Section 25.25(c) provided no relief for 1993. Allocation of value cannot be corrected using Section 25.25(c). Aramco Associated Company v. Harris County Appraisal District and Harris County Appraisal Review Board, 33 S.W.3d 361 (Tex. App. - Texarkana 2000, pet. denied).
A property owner's ability to change the approved tax appraisal rolls is clearly limited. Any motion made pursuant to Section 25.25(d), including a motion to correct the appraised market value of agricultural property, must be filed before the date the yearly property taxes - not the rollback taxes - on the subject land become delinquent. The term "taxes" used in Section 25.25(d) refers only to the yearly property taxes. Anderton v. Rockwall Central Appraisal District and Appraisal Review Board, 26 S.W.3d 539 (Tex. App.- Dallas [5th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied).
Under Section 25.25(c)(3), "inclusion of property that does not exist in the form or at the location described in the appraisal roll" allows correction of the appraisal roll only when the appraisal roll erroneously reflects that a particular form of property exists at a specified location and, in fact, no such property exists at that location. Because the property owner complained about property value, not the existence or nonexistence of certain "forms" of property at the particular location, the appraisal roll was not amended under Section 25.25(c)(3). Because Section 25.25(c)(3) only authorizes changes for errors in the description of the form or location of property in the appraisal roll, the court has not authority to look behind the appraisal roll to the rendition filed by the property owner's agent. Titanium Metals Corporation v. Dallas County Appraisal District, 3 S.W.3d 63 (Tex. App. -- Dallas [5th District] 1999).
Relying on the finding in G.E. American Communication and 1997 legislative amendments, a court appeal under Section 25.25(g) requires a substantive review of the appraisal review board proceedings and decision. The trial court determines whether the review board's decision is reasonably supported by substantial evidence and is otherwise free from fraud, bad faith, and an abuse of discretion. Benmar Place, L.P. v. Harris County Appraisal District, 997 S.W.2d 282 (Tex. App. -- Houston [14th District] 1999).
Square footage errors are correctable as clerical errors, and the appraisal review board under Section 25.25(c)(1) may review to determine whether a clerical error was made. Handy Hardware Wholesale, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District, 985 S.W.2d 618 (Tex. App. -- Houston [1st District] 1999).
Based on the 1997 amendments by the Texas Legislature, taxpayers are entitled to full judicial review of appraisal review board decisions under Section 25.25 made after January 1, 1998. Decisions prior to January 1, 1998 are made under a substantial evidence de novo standard. G.E. American Communication v. Galveston Central Appraisal District, 979 S.W.2d 761 (Tex. App. -- Houston [1st District] 1998).
Tax Code Section 25.25(g) provides for full judicial review of appraisal review board decisions made pursuant to Section 25.25. The relief available under Section 25.25 is clearly different and more limited than that available under Chapter 41. GE Capital Corporation v. Dallas Central Appraisal District, 971 S.W.2d 591 (Tex. App. -- Dallas 1998).
The prior property owner's settlement of a protest barred a future owner from Property Tax Code Section 25.25(d) relief for that tax year. Dallas Central Appraisal District v. Park Stemmons, Ltd., 948 S.W.2d 11 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1997).
Property Tax Code Section 1.04(18) definition of clerical error should be read that subsections (A) and (B) are independent of each other. Subsection (A) is not limited to errors by the appraisal district or taxing units, but may include errors by the taxpayer. Comdisco, Inc. v. Tarrant County Appraisal District, 927 S.W.2d 325 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 1996, rehearing overruled).
The 45-day provision in Property Tax Code Section 25.25(g) is mandatory and jurisdictional. Fountain Parkway, Ltd. v. Tarrant Appraisal District, 920 S.W.2d 799 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 1996, writ denied).
Under Property Tax Code Section 25.25(c)(3), the appraisal review board may not look past the actual appraisal roll to determine whether an error had actually occurred as to the "form of the property" as shown on that roll. The statutory meaning of "form of the property" concerns whether the property is correctly identified as real property, personal property, an improvement to real property or some other typical physical description of that property. A review board's previous actions in reviewing the actual physical condition of a business property was therefore incorrect. It was not relevant that the appraisal review board had used this methodology of review in the past to modify items other than what information was shown on the appraisal roll. Dallas Central Appraisal District v. G.T.E. Directories Corporation, 905 S.W.2d 318 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1995, writ denied).
When appraising railroad rolling stock, an appraisal district must correct its failure to grant an interstate use allocation under Section 25.25 (c)(3) - "property was not in the location shown on the appraisal roll." Failure of the taxpayer to render its property does not foreclose the use of Section 25.25. The filing of such a rendition is permissive and not mandatory, notwithstanding the statutory language contained in Section 22.01. Himont USA, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District, 904 S.W.2d 740 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st District] 1995).
The subsequent purchaser of property is not barred from contesting the property's value under Section 25.25(d) when the previous owner had timely filed a protest of the property's value and then withdrew the protest because of the pending land sale. Jim Sowell Construction Company, Inc. v. Dallas Central Appraisal District, 900 S.W.2d 82 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1995, writ pending).
A clerical error under Sec. 25.25(c)(1), Tax Code, does not include a mistake made by a property owner. Collin County Appraisal Dist. v. Northeast Dallas Assoc., 855 S.W.2d 843 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1993, no writ).
The term "form" in Sec. 25.25(c)(3) refers to the physical description of the property, not to the use of the property. Id.
Chapter 41, Tax Code, provides protest procedures a taxpayer may use to correct an error made by the taxpayer. To allow Sec. 25.25(c)(1)'s clerical error provision to do the same thing would give a taxpayer two identical remedies, which was not the intent of the Legislature. Id.
In a case involving double payments by taxpayers on the same property, in response to the argument by the taxing units that the taxpayers had to exhaust administrative remedies under chapters 41 and 42, Tax Code, before filing suit, the court said that Sec. 25.25(a) provides remedies other than the "protest" remedy listed in chapters 41 and 42. Brooks County Central Appraisal District v. Tipperary Energy Corporation, 847 S.W.2d 592 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1992, no writ).
In a case where the taxing units argued that even if the appropriate remedies were sought by the taxpayers, the taxpayers were still required to file a "correction motion" with the appraisal review board under Sec. 25.25(c), as well as appear before the board to present evidence substantiating their "clerical error" allegation. The court found that the taxpayer had made several requests to the various taxing units for refunds, and that the appraisal review board had twice considered and denied the motion for tax refund due to overpayment or erroneous payments. In addition, the court found that there was no evidence to indicate that the review board sent the taxpayer notice of the hearing on its motion. The court also found that chapter 25, Tax Code, has no detailed procedure corresponding to the procedure set forth in chapters 41 and 42. Section 25.25(c) refers to a "motion" but does not require that the review board hold a hearing on such motion, nor that the taxpayer appear at such hearing. Therefore, the court concluded that there was still sufficient compliance with the statutory administrative prerequisites prior to filing suit by the taxpayer. Id.
The trial court erred in granting summary judgment for a taxpayer based upon the failure of the appraisal district and appraisal review board to answer requests for admission resulting in a deemed admission that the taxpayer's 1982 appraisal was the result of a clerical error. The determination that an error is clerical in nature is a question of law; thus, it is not subject to resolution by a deemed admission. Fort Bend Central Appraisal District v. Hines Wholesale Nurseries, 844 S.W.2d 857 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1992, writ denied). Sec. 25.25 gives a trial court jurisdiction to decide whether a clerical error exists in an appraisal roll. A mistake which is clerical in nature is one which is not the result of judicial reasoning, evidence, or determination. Whether an error is clerical is a question of law. Matagorda County Appraisal District v. Conquest Exploration Co., 788 S.W.2d 687 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 1990, no writ).
A taxpayer seeking correction of a clerical error that affects tax liability must exhaust his administrative remedies by filing a correction motion with the Appraisal Review Board before bringing suit in district court for a refund. Liland v. Dallas CAD, 731 S.W.2d 109 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1987, no writ).
While a taxing unit is not bound to do anything by a court decision against the appraisal district and appraisal review board, the unit is affected by court ordered changes by the appraisal district and review board in correcting rolls because of initial inappropriate appraisal procedures. Alief Independent School District v. Harris County Appraisal District and Harris County Appraisal Review Board, 731 S.W.2d 628 (Tex. App.-Houston 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.).
Under Sec. 25.25(d), an ARB may correct an erroneous market value of real property that was appraised at a value based on a capitalization method used in Secs. 23.41, 23.52 or 23.73 if the corrected market value would be less than the appraised value, and Sec. 25.25(d) is otherwise complied with. Tex. Att'y Gen. LO-94-019 (1994).
Texas Property Tax Code
2004 Edition
2004 Edition