The Petitioner applied for the
homestead deduction using the sales disclosure form as allowed by 50 IAC
24-4-3. The Petitioner testified that the subject property is her primary
residence and she owns no other real property. A homestead deduction may be
removed if it is determined the individual is no longer eligible for the
deduction because the use of the property changed so that it is no longer the
principal place of residence or the individual has the homestead deduction on
another parcel. The Respondent, however, offered no substantial evidence that
the subject property is not the Petitioner’s primary residence or that she owns
other real property.
The Respondent focused on other
things. The Respondent contends the Petitioner should not have received the
homestead deduction because when she returned her homestead verification form
in 2012, she did not have documents corroborating her residency, such as a
valid Indiana driver’s license. The lack of documentation triggered a
legitimate investigation. The Respondent’s current position assumes the lack of
an Indiana driver’s license, tax return, and voter registration necessarily establishes
lack of the required residency. But the Respondent cited no applicable
authority for that position. For example, holding an Indiana driver’s license
is not required for the homestead deduction per the Department of Local
Government Finance release of November 13, 2012. The fact that the Bureau of
Motor Vehicles requires a new resident to obtain an Indiana driver’s license
within 60 days is not determinative. At most, the lack of this kind of normal documentation
is a factor to be considered along with other evidence when determining a
residency claim. Lack of that documentation is not conclusive.
Other than the lack of
documentation (Indiana driver’s license, tax return, or voter registration),
the Respondent did not submit evidence showing the Petitioner was not entitled
to the homestead deduction. The Respondent did not submit probative evidence
that any of the Petitioner’s testimony about residence is untrue or unreliable.
The Respondent failed to prove the Petitioner did not use the property as her
primary residence. The Respondent failed to prove the Petitioner had a
homestead deduction for another property.
The Petitioner testified that the
property is now a licensed bed and breakfast and she has two rooms available
for rent when she is in residence, but 2012 was the first full-time year for
the bed and breakfast. Based on the evidence presented, the Petitioner used the
subject property as her primary residence in 2011. Therefore, the Respondent improperly
removed the homestead deduction for taxes based on the 2011 assessment. As to
the issue of a partial deduction, there is nothing in the record to show
exactly when the Petitioner started her business or what specific portion of
the property is affected. The Board, therefore, will not address that issue.
