…
The
Correction of error statute provides, in relevant part
(a) Subject to the limitations
contained in subsections (c) and (d) [inapplicable in this case], a county
auditor shall correct errors which are discovered in the tax duplicate for any
one (1) or more of the following reasons: … (8) Through an error of
omission by any state or county officer, the taxpayer was not given: (A) the
proper credit under IC 6-1.1-20.6-7.5 for property taxes imposed for an
assessment date after January 15, 2011...
Thus, while the Board has the
authority to address a Form 133 appeal in which a taxpayer claims that she has
been denied the proper credit under Ind. Code § 6-1.1-20.6-7.5, that authority
is limited to claims regarding credits for taxes based on assessments from 2011
forward. Because Ms. Marzolf’s appeal relates to the March 1, 2009, assessment
date, the Board lacks authority to address her claim about the subject
property’s “circuit breaker allocation,” even if one assumes that she could raise such a claim
for the first time at the Board’s hearing.
…
Ms. Marzolf testified without
contradiction that the Marzolfs bought the subject property on contract
sometime in 2009, used the subject property for their primary residence in
2009, and timely applied for the standard deduction for the March 1, 2009
assessment year. Any doubt as to the accuracy of Ms. Marzolf’s testimony is
removed by the fact that local officials accepted the Marzolfs’ application and
applied the standard deduction to 25% of the subject property’s assessment.
Thus, the only question is whether the entire property, rather than 25% of it,
qualified for the standard deduction.
The entire property qualified. There is no dispute that the Marzolfs used the subject property as their primary residence and that they did not use any part of the property for anything else. The Assessor, however, reads the standard deduction statute as requiring the Marzolfs to have physically used the entire house as their residence during 2009. In the Assessor’s view, the parts of the house that remained unused during the conversion were not entitled to the standard deduction.
The Board disagrees. By taking affirmative steps to convert the house into a single-family residence while they lived in it, the Marzolfs constructively, if not actively, used the entire property as their primary residence....
Because the Marzolfs used the entire home as their primary residence in 2009 and otherwise met the requirements for receiving the standard deduction, that deduction should be applied to the subject property’s March 1, 2009 assessment in its entirety. Also, while the parties did not explicitly reference it, Ind. Code § 6-1.1-12-37.5 provides a supplemental deduction for homesteads that is tied to the standard deduction: (a) A person who is entitled to a standard deduction from the assessed value of property under section 37 of this chapter is also entitled to receive a supplemental deduction from the assessed value of the homestead to which the standard deduction applies after the application of the standard deduction but before the application of any other deduction, exemption, or credit for which the person is eligible. . . . (c) The auditor of the county shall record and make the deduction for the person qualifying for the deduction. . . . I.C. § 6-1.1-12-37.5. The Marzolfs are therefore entitled to have the supplemental deduction applied to the entire property’s assessment after the standard deduction is applied.
The entire property qualified. There is no dispute that the Marzolfs used the subject property as their primary residence and that they did not use any part of the property for anything else. The Assessor, however, reads the standard deduction statute as requiring the Marzolfs to have physically used the entire house as their residence during 2009. In the Assessor’s view, the parts of the house that remained unused during the conversion were not entitled to the standard deduction.
The Board disagrees. By taking affirmative steps to convert the house into a single-family residence while they lived in it, the Marzolfs constructively, if not actively, used the entire property as their primary residence....
Because the Marzolfs used the entire home as their primary residence in 2009 and otherwise met the requirements for receiving the standard deduction, that deduction should be applied to the subject property’s March 1, 2009 assessment in its entirety. Also, while the parties did not explicitly reference it, Ind. Code § 6-1.1-12-37.5 provides a supplemental deduction for homesteads that is tied to the standard deduction: (a) A person who is entitled to a standard deduction from the assessed value of property under section 37 of this chapter is also entitled to receive a supplemental deduction from the assessed value of the homestead to which the standard deduction applies after the application of the standard deduction but before the application of any other deduction, exemption, or credit for which the person is eligible. . . . (c) The auditor of the county shall record and make the deduction for the person qualifying for the deduction. . . . I.C. § 6-1.1-12-37.5. The Marzolfs are therefore entitled to have the supplemental deduction applied to the entire property’s assessment after the standard deduction is applied.
http://www.in.gov/ibtr/files/Marzolf_02-074-09-3-5-01307.pdf
