7 results for 'cat:"Tax" AND cat:"Covid-19"'.
J. Pohlman finds that the State Tax Commission properly rejected taxpayers' argument that the Covid-19 pandemic entitled them to an adjustment to the fair market value of their properties for the tax year 2020 under the Access Interruption Statute. The pandemic was not a qualifying event under the law, and the list of qualifying events may only be expanded through promulgation by the Commission after it determines an additional event is similar to the 13 legislatively enumerated events. Affirmed.
Court: Utah Supreme Court, Judge: Pohlman, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 20220345, Categories: Property, tax, covid-19
J. DeWine finds the temporary law during the Covid-19 pandemic that allowed municipalities to collect taxes from stay-at-home employees that did not live within their borders did not violate the due process clause. There was a rational basis for the law; specifically, the law allowed municipalities to stabilize their tax income during a period of rapid change to stay-at-home work that would otherwise have crippled their budgets. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: DeWine, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-525, Categories: tax, Due Process, covid-19
J. Lauber finds for the commissioner of internal revenue in tax liability claims because the taxpayer failed to demonstrate that the government's Covid-19 response excused him from reporting long-term capital gains.
Court: U.S. Tax Court, Judge: Lauber, Filed On: July 20, 2023, Case #: 2023-91, Categories: tax, covid-19
J. Berkenkotter finds that the district court properly dismissed a claim by commercial taxpayers to revalue their properties for the 2020 tax year due to the Covid-19 pandemic and related public health orders. A county tax assessor may not revalue and reassess real property after the January 1 assessment date. Any unusual condition that requires revaluation must be considered in the subsequent tax year. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Berkenkotter, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: 22SC799, Categories: Property, tax, covid-19
J. Berkenkotter finds that the district court erroneously granted taxpayers summary judgment on their claim for 2020 property tax revaluations due to the Covid-19 pandemic and related public health orders. An unusual condition that occurs after the January 1 assessment date must be considered in the next property tax year. Also, taxpayers bear the burden to show that the unusual condition was present before the applicable assessment date, their properties were affected and that the assessed values were wrong. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Berkenkotter, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: 22SC800, Categories: Property, tax, covid-19
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Marquez finds that the trial court properly rejected claims to revalue parcels of land for the 2020 tax year due to Covid-19 for failure to state a claim. The Covid-19 pandemic and related public health orders did not constitute "unusual conditions" that would require the revaluation of real property for 2020 tax purposes. The pandemic was not a "detrimental act of nature" and the public health orders were not regulations that restricted the use of owners' property. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Marquez, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: 22SC797, Categories: Property, tax, covid-19
J. Marquez finds that the trial court properly rejected claims to revalue parcels of land for the 2020 tax year due to Covid-19 for failure to state a claim. The Covid-19 pandemic and related public health orders did not constitute "unusual conditions" that would require the revaluation of real property for 2020 tax purposes. The pandemic was not a "detrimental act of nature" and the public health orders were not regulations that restricted the use of owners' property. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Marquez, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: 22SC798, Categories: Property, tax, covid-19