Thursday, May 3, 2012

DLGF Posts Information on all Referenda


Construction Project Referenda

May 2012 Elections


School Tax Levy Referenda

May 2012 Elections


Outstanding Bonded Indebtedness Referenda

May 2012 Elections



http://www.in.gov/dlgf/8789.htm

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

More on Porter County's Attempt to Grant Amnesty for Homestead Exemption Violations

An excerpt of a lengthy story in the Chesterton Tribune:
...

Several County Council members attended Tuesday’s County Commissioner meeting where Commissioner President John Evans, R-North, veered off the agenda to address reaction spurred by County Auditor Robert Wichlinski’s move last week to excuse homestead credit violators from paying back taxes if they corrected their homestead credit records with the auditor’s office. After learning there is no state law that allows counties authority to do that, Evans asked council members and State Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, what can be done to straighten out delinquent tax issues.

“Since this has come up in the last few days, not many of us know what our options are,” said Evans.

Soliday said there is a law just put into place, House Bill 1090, which he co-authored, that allows the county council to grant a one-year moratorium on all interest and penalties on real property, businesses and residencies, owed before Jan. 1, 2012. The taxpayer can have their fees dropped if they are able to pay up all current and back taxes through a payment plan agreed to by the county treasurer by July 1, 2013.

The bill, Soliday said, was based on a system which Lake County already had in place to keep properties from winding up on tax sales in these “terrible economic times” and applied it statewide. Often counties would be stuck with properties they could not sell because the taxes exceeded the actual value of the property, Soliday said.

HB 1090 gives delinquent taxpayers an incentive to settle delinquencies with the county from the last three years, and in turn, a way for the county to collect more revenue owed to taxing units. That includes delinquencies from homestead violators.

But Soliday said every county is different in the way they collect revenue which makes the HB 1090 measure “extremely complex.”
...

Soliday said he has been in communication with the DLGF hoping it can render an opinion on multi-unit exemptions. He said the law really is intended for “one-two-three-four” places, where 25 percent of a multi-unit property is a residence which receives the homestead credit and the other 75 percent is run as a business and should receive no exemption. A scenario that is not as black-and-white is when “the little old widow rents out a room to a college student,” said Soliday.

The part of the law requiring counties to recoup unpaid taxes is easier to understand. “The law is clear. You must collect the taxes,” Soliday said.

The county has collected over $1.4 million in revenue from homestead violations, Evans said, which has been put into a non-reverting fund in the auditor’s budget. Soliday questioned whether the money should be stored in a non-reverting fund as state lawmakers never anticipated that type of fund accumulating such a large amount.

A few County Council members have posed the same question including Karen Conover, R-3rd, who feels the money should be returned to the taxing units hit hard by the tax caps. “It should be shared,” she said.

Evans said he would like to see the money go into the county’s general fund once the auditor’s expenses are covered. Soliday said he would be interested in drawing up a bill that could accomplish that.
...

Meanwhile, County Treasurer Mike Bucko said he has no authority to give tax amnesty, but is considering payment plans that make it easier for delinquent taxpayers to catch up on taxes and eliminate the risk of appearing on the list for a sheriff’s sale.

In regards to possible amnesty plans, Bucko said the nature of those would have to be determined by the county council.
...

 
http://chestertontribune.com/PorterCounty/new_state_law_may_give_new_life.htm

Revenue Finds Public Transportation Exemption Applies to Taxpayer Transporting Waste Generated by Others

...

The public transportation exemption is available for taxpayers who transport the property of other persons. The issue in this case is whether Taxpayer owns the waste generated and transported.

Taxpayer notes that, in general, transporting of residential and general business garbage does not qualify for the exemption provided under IC § 6-2.5-5-27. However, Taxpayer asserts that the contractual and regulatory requirements governing the waste transported by Taxpayer cannot permit ownership in that waste by anyone other than the customer.

In this particular case, Taxpayer has provided a copy of the standard contract between the landfill operator and the steel mill. Pursuant to the terms of the contract, "Title to any and all Waste handled or disposed of by [the customer] shall at all times remain with [the customer] and Broker (if a Broker is involved)." Furthermore, the contract provides the landfill operator has the right to inspect and reject any waste that was sent to the landfill prior to disposal at the landfill.

Further, Taxpayer cites to various regulations under 329 IAC 10 which provide for notification and inspection requirements related to the customer's waste. However, the specific regulations cited by Taxpayer–with one exception–were repealed in July 2004.

Even given the requirement that exemption statutes be narrowly construed against a taxpayer and in favor of taxation, this Taxpayer has met its burden of demonstrating that the waste it transports on behalf of its customers was in fact the customer's property. Therefore, Taxpayer has affirmatively established it transported its customer's property and the items assessed were used in public transportation.

http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/20120425-IR-045120182NRA.xml.html

Shelby County Seeks Contractor for Help with Assessment

From the Shelbyville News:

The county assessor's office needs help completeting a state-mandated audit -- and assessment -- in the next five years.

Shelby County Commissioners opened bids for an outside company to complete the project at Monday's meeting that includes identifying trends, collecting land value data and conducting ratio studies, which compare price per square foot of different properties.

"There's a re-assessment that's done in every county every five years," Shelby County Assessor Anne Thurston said.

It is very labor-intensive and complex work, she said, and the current assessor's staff cannot handle the extra burden.

"I'm the only one who's had the training in my office," Thurston said. "They do a lot of work."

Tyler Technologies of Texas sent in a bid for $125,900 per year $629,500 over five years. A bid for $137,850 per year came from the Nexus Group out of Zionsville, for a total of $689,250 over five years. GnA Assessment Professionals of Greensburg submitted a bid for $123,000 per year, for $615,000 total.

After reviewing the bids, Thurston will make her recommendation and the commissioners will award the contract at their May 14 meeting.
...

http://www.shelbynews.com/articles/2012/05/02/news/doc4fa033ecd7d4a810608242.txt

Mossberg Industries Approved for Ten Year Real Estate Tax Abatement for Expansion in Garrett

From the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette:

Mossberg Industries has decided to expand operations in Garrett, a company official confirmed today.

Greg Baker, the manufacturer’s controller, said the company is still working out some details, but has decided to invest about $2.3 million to add 28,800 square feet and renovate the building at 204 N. Second St.

Mossberg, a plastic injection molding company, also will invest $250,000 in new equipment.
...

Mossberg employs about 50 in Garrett and expects to create five new jobs with the expansion. Local officials have approved a 10-year real estate tax abatement and a five-year tax break on the new equipment.

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20120502/BIZ/120509886/1031/SEARCH

Porter County Plans Ordinance to Provide Relief to Residents Who Owe Back Taxes Due to Homestead Exemption Violations

From the Northwest Indiana Times:

The Porter County Council will have a proposed ordinance on its May 22 agenda that would offer some relief to residents who owe back taxes from homestead exemption violations.

Council President Dan Whitten made that promise to County Board of Commissioners President John Evans during Tuesday's commissioners' meeting. The violations happen when people own multifamily buildings and live in part of a building but receive a homestead exemption on the entire building.
...

County Auditor Bob Wichlinski at first said he would grant amnesty for past years because it would be too hard to calculate the exact amount owed. That decision was overturned by the state's Department of Local Government Finance, which ruled the money had to be collected.

State Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, said Tuesday it appears the state law allows the county's fiscal body, the council, to approve a moratorium on one year of penalties and interest and also allow the county treasurer to set up a one-year payment plan for the remaining money owed.

Soliday said he is awaiting written confirmation from the state agency, but he disputed Wichlinski's claim that the interest and penalties go to the state. Soliday said the state gets nothing. The taxes go into the auditor's nonreverting fund, which was meant to cover the cost of collecting the taxes, but Soliday said the law did not envision a case that would involve $1.4 million as this does.

Evans made a request to which Soliday said it is his intent to introduce a bill that would allow the money to go to the county general fund and to the various taxing entities. But it would happen only after enough money was set aside to cover the auditor's expenses.

County Councilwoman Karen Conover said all the taxing entities are experiencing financial problems because of the tax caps and the shortfalls caused by the recession, and the auditor should not be able to keep all of the funds. Evans said the problem will be figuring out how to do a fair assessment to determine how much of a multi-unit building is eligible for the homestead exemption.

Soliday and Assessor John Snyder said they asked the state agency how other counties handled the calculation without going into each building and measuring the rooms. Soliday said nobody wants to go after the little old lady who rents a spare room to a college student.

The council has to enact the ordinance by July 1, and it would apply to taxes owed before Jan. 1 of this year.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/porter-county-might-give-homestead-violators-some-help/article_c9d5d4de-cba7-5b46-9580-e956b3254a71.html

Lake County Property Taxes Due May 25th

From the Northwest Indiana Times:

Lake County Treasurer John Petalas reminds local property owners the deadline for paying the first installment of the this year's property tax is May 25.

Bills can be paid at the treasurer's offices at the Lake County Government Complex, 2293 N. Main St., Crown Point, and the satellite county courthouses at 401 Broadway in Gary, and 232 Russell St. in Hammond.

Payments also can be made at any branch offices of these financial institutions: American Savings FSB, American Trust & Savings Bank, Centier, Chase Bank, Citizens Financial Bank, DeMotte State Bank, First Federal Savings and Loan, First Midwest, First National Bank, BMO Harris Bank, Horizon, Lake Federal Bank, Main Source Bank, National City, Peoples Bank,  PNC Bank, and Tech Federal Credit Union's Indiana branches.

Petalas said any taxpayers who have a problem with the amount of their bill shouldn't go to the banks, but rather his offices. He asks that people who phone his office in the days before the deadline be patient because his staff must field several hundred calls per hour during this period.

He said property owners can pay by credit card online by logging on at the county government website at http://www.lakecountyin.org/ and then clicking on the treasurer's office link. Petalas said they also can use the Voice Max payment system by calling (800) 601-1059. Credit cards are not accepted in his office.

Petalas said a nonrefundable, 3 percent fee is charged by the credit card company, not county government, in addition to taxes owed to process the payment. He said taxpayers can avoid the 3 percent fee by using an e-check, which costs 75 cents per transaction.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/lake-co-taxes-due-may/article_35484ef5-1084-5b95-853e-82128519b2ca.html

Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Editorial Calls for Quick Action on Audit of Monroe County Auditor

From the Bloomington Herald-Times:
...

Monroe County badly needs some form of closure on issues involving auditor Amy Gerstman. She’s been front-page news for almost six months since it was learned she charged county-issued credit cards for thousands of dollars in personal purchases she later paid back.

The most questionable expenditures were claims in January 2011 for travel expenses she never booked. She was quizzed about the the expenses in November 2011 and repaid the county at that time for the $2,500 she had been paid for her claim. After that, the commissioners asked for the state audit for which the results are still weeks away.

In the meantime, Gerstman’s effectiveness as auditor has been sorely compromised. She admitted recently her office was responsible for an error related to property tax billing that will result in collecting about $1 million less from taxpayers than governmental units were anticipating — which could affect the operation of those units and the services they provide.

It’s difficult to be patient about these results when such a key office holder in the county is under such a cloud. The sun needs to shine through soon on what the state board has learned so all can move forward.

http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2012/05/01/digitalcity.taxpayers-need-state-report-on-monroe-county-auditor.sto

State Prohibits Porter County's Proposed "Amnesty" Program

From the Northwest Indiana Times:

The state has reversed last week's decision by Porter County officials to grant temporary amnesty to the owners of hundreds of multi-unit residential buildings who have been receiving a larger homestead deduction than is allowed by law.

Porter County Auditor Bob Wichlinski must comply with the law by collecting three years of back taxes, interest and a penalty of 10 percent, said Catherine Wolter, general counsel for the Indiana Department of Local Government Finance.
...

While bill amounts will vary, a random example provided last week by the auditor's office amounted to just more than $6,000.

The violations involve owners who live in their multi-unit buildings and have been receiving a homestead deduction on their entire structure rather than just the portion that makes up their primary residence, Wichlinski said last week. The violations have been occurring for many years, he said.

Wichlinski said he decided upon the amnesty approach because there is no foolproof way of determining whether the property owner knowingly took advantage of the tax break. It is also unclear whether county employees made the distinction clear to taxpayers when they applied for the deduction.

"We're going to do what we have to do to become in compliance with the law," he said Monday.

Valparaiso Mayor Jon Costas said the change in approach is good news to the municipalities and schools.

"Right now, it is important to collect every tax dollar that is properly levied," he said.

The city used to collect 98 to 99 percent of the revenue it had coming, but that number fell to the range of 92 percent over the past three years for a total loss of nearly $3 million, Costas said.

Wichlinski said the penalty money collected will be turned over to the state, and the back taxes and interest will go the auditor's nonreverting fund, which has paid, in part, for the crackdown on homestead violations.

Wichlinski said he will work with the assessor's office to determine what percentage of each property in question should receive the deduction. The new figures will be used in preparing all future bills.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/porter/duneland/state-officials-say-porter-county-must-collect-from-homestead-violators/article_04c9d201-8911-545b-ac66-f992ffa6ac88.html

Finish Line Receives Tax Credits for Indianapolis Expansion

From the Indianapolis Business Journal:

Indianapolis-based The Finish Line Inc., a national retailer of athletic shoes and apparel, announced Tuesday morning that it plans to add 327 jobs by 2016 as part of a multimillion-dollar expansion to upgrade its e-commerce offerings.

The Finish Line, located at 3308 N. Mitthoeffer Road on the far-east side, said the investment will go toward technology upgrades, including improvements to its computer and distribution systems. The company also plans to remodel office space at its headquarters.

The company said it plans to create a "consistent brand experience" across the retailer's stores, its website and its other social media and direct-mail offerings. The overhaul also will upgrade Finish Line's distribution and merchandise computer systems.

The Indiana Economic Development Corp. said it will provide The Finish Line with up to $2.7 million in performance-based tax credits and up to $250,000 in training grants based on the company’s job-creation plans. The city of Indianapolis will consider additional property-tax abatements.
...
                             
Finish Line in 2008 won a similar incentive deal for an expansion that never fully materialized.

That deal, which included a 10-year tax abatement worth $2.25 million, called for the company to invest $10 million to build a warehouse and distribution building, $2 million to upgrade its existing headquarters, and $12.4 million to upgrade logistics, IT and telecommunications equipment.

In 2010, the company agreed to forfeit the abatements because it wasn’t able to meet a promise to create 183 jobs and invest $24 million, due to “unforeseen economic circumstances,” the company said at the time.

http://www.ibj.com/finish-line-plans-to-add-327-jobs-as-part-of-expansion/PARAMS/article/34149

DLGF Provides Guidance on "Cyclical Reassessment" as Required by SEA 19

Introduction

On March 19, 2012, Governor Mitch Daniels signed into law Senate Enrolled Act 19 (“SEA 19”), which eliminates the practice of general reassessment and implements a method of cyclical reassessment.

This memorandum provides guidance on cyclical reassessment through analysis of eight specific topics: (1) the Cyclical Reassessment Plan; (2) the Petition for Reassessment; (3) Contracts with Professional Appraisers; (4) the Timeframe to Complete the Cyclical Reassessment; (5) Notices to Taxpayers; (6) the Reassessment Fund & Budget; (7) Interim Assessments; and (8) County Assessor Equalization.

Cyclical Reassessment Plan (IC 6-1.1-4-4.2, as added by Section 2 of SEA 19, effective July 1, 2012)

The cyclical reassessment of property will take the place of the general reassessment that had been scheduled for 2017. The basic premise of cyclical reassessment is to apportion reassessment activities, including the inspection and updating of parcels and parcel characteristics in an assessment jurisdiction, over a four-year period instead of the familiar twenty-month timeframe. This will allow reassessment work and expenses to be spread more consistently and predictably over a longer period of time, facilitating better assessment practices.

The county assessor must, before July 1, 2013 and before July 1 of every fourth year thereafter, prepare and submit to the Department of Local Government Finance (Department) a reassessment plan (“Plan”) for the county. The Plan is subject to approval by the Department, and the Department must complete its review and approval before March 1 of the following year. The Department must review and approve the Plan before March 1, 2014. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the parcels within each class of real property must be completed on or before March 1, 2015. A county may submit a Plan that provides for the reassessment of more than 25% of the parcels in the county in a particular year, but the Plan must still cover a four-year period. The Plan must also specify the dates by which the assessor will submit the land values to the Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals (“PTABOA”). The assessor may modify the reassessment plan subject to review and approval by the Department.

The Plan must divide all parcels of real property in the county into four different groups, with each group containing approximately 25% of the parcels within each class of real property in the county. The Department will determine the classes of real property to be used by January 15, 2013. Assessing officials will be notified via memorandum when that has been determined.

The reassessment of a group of parcels in a particular class of real property, which must include a physical inspection of each of those parcels, begins July 1 of a year and must be completed on or before March 1 of the following year. Thus, for the March 1, 2015 assessment date, reassessment commences July 1, 2014 and must be completed on or before March 1, 2015.

All real property must be reassessed once during each cyclical reassessment cycle, and the reassessment is the basis for taxes payable in the year following the year in which the reassessment is to be completed.

Order for Reassessment (IC 6-1.1-4-5.5, as added by Section 5 of SEA 19, effective January 1, 2013)

A petition for the reassessment of a real property group designated under a county’s Plan may be filed with the Department not later than 45 days after notice of assessment. A petition for reassessment applies only to the most recent real property assessment date. The petition must be signed by the lesser of 100 owners of parcels in the group or 5% of owners of parcels in the group. The signatures on the petition must be verified by the oath of one or more of the signers. A certificate from the county auditor stating that the signers constitute the required number of owners of taxable real property in the group of parcels must accompany the petition. Upon receipt of a petition, the Department may order or conduct a reassessment.

Even if a petition is not filed, the Department may, under IC 6-1.1-4-9 (as amended by Section 7 of SEA 19 and effective January 1, 2013), adopt a resolution declaring its belief that it is necessary to reassess all or a portion of the real property located within the state. If the Department adopts a reassessment resolution, and if either a township or a larger area is involved (for assessments before March 1, 2015) or one or more groups of parcels under a county’s reassessment plan are involved (for assessments after February 28, 2015), the Department must hold a hearing concerning the necessity for the reassessment at the courthouse of the county in which the property is located. The Department must give notice of the time and place of the hearing in the manner provided in IC 6-1.1-4-10.

After the hearing, or if the area involved is less than a township (for assessments before March 1, 2015) or is less than one group of parcels under the county’s reassessment plan (for assessments after February 28, 2015), after the adoption of the resolution of the Department, the Department may order any reassessment it deems necessary. The order must specify the time within which the reassessment must be completed and the date the reassessment will become effective.

Under IC 6-1.1-33.5-6, as amended by Section 45 of SEA 19 (effective January 1, 2013), the Department may still initiate a review to determine whether to order a special reassessment with regard to real or personal property in a township or county for any year.

If the Department determines to initiate a review with respect to the real property within a particular cycle under a county’s Plan or a part of the real property within a cycle, the Department’s Data Division must determine for the real property under consideration and for all groups of parcels within a particular cycle the variance between:

(1) the total assessed valuation of the real property within all groups of parcels within a particular cycle; and

(2) the total assessed valuation that would result if the real property within all groups of parcels within a particular cycle were valued in the manner provided by law.

Contracts with Professional Appraisers

Under the old reassessment law, counties had a limited window during which they could enter into a contract with a professional appraiser to perform a general reassessment: January 1 until April 16 of the year in which the reassessment was to commence. Under cyclical reassessment (IC 6-1.1-4-20), the Department may establish a period during which a county assessor may enter into a contract with a professional appraiser. In the near future, the Department will issue further guidance on contracts with professional appraisers.

The Timeframe to Complete Cyclical Reassessments (IC 6-1.1-4-21.4, as added by Section 15 of SEA 19, effective July 1, 2012)

Before October 1 of the year in which the group’s reassessment under the Plan begins, the county assessor must complete the appraisal of one-third of the parcels in a group. Before January 1 of the year following the year in which the group’s reassessment under the Plan begins, the county assessor must have two-thirds of the parcels in the group completed. Finally, before March 1 of the year following the year in which the group’s reassessment under the Plan begins, all the parcels in the group must be completed. For example, the county assessor must begin appraisals by July 1, 2014 in order for 25% of the parcels in a group to be reassessed by March 1, 2015. The assessor must complete one-third of the parcels in the group before October 1, 2014, the assessor must complete two-thirds of the parcels in the group before January 1, 2015, and must complete all parcels in the group before March 1, 2015.

If a county assessor employs a professional appraiser or appraisal firm, the appraiser or firm must file appraisal reports with the assessor by the above deadlines.

Notices to Taxpayers (IC 6-1.1-4-22, as amended by Section 16 of SEA 19, effective January 1, 2013)

If any assessing official assesses or reassesses any real property, the official must give notice to the taxpayer of the amount of the assessment or reassessment by mail or by using electronic mail that includes a secure Internet link to the information in the notice. The official must provide notice by the earlier of: (1) 90 days after the official completes the appraisal of a parcel or the official receives a report on a parcel from a professional appraiser or professional appraisal firm; or (2) April 10 of the year in which the assessment date for which the assessment or reassessment first applies (in other words, by April 10, 2015 for a March 1, 2015 assessment date).

This notice must be provided in addition to any required notice of assessment or reassessment included in a property tax statement under IC 6-1.1-22 or IC 6-1.1-22.5 and must include notice of the opportunity to appeal the assessed valuation under IC 6-1.1-15-1; the procedure that a taxpayer must follow to appeal the assessment or reassessment; the forms that must be filed for an appeal of the assessment or reassessment; and notification that an appeal of the assessment or reassessment requires evidence relevant to the true tax value of the taxpayer’s property as of the assessment date.

The Reassessment Fund & Budget (IC 6-1.1-4-27.5, as amended by Section 17, effective January 1, 2013)

Under a county’s Plan, the county council must, for property taxes due each year, levy against all the taxable property in the county an amount equal to the estimated costs of the reassessment for the group of parcels to be reassessed in that year. The Department must, before January 1 in a year, give to each county council notice of the tax levy required for this purpose for that year and may raise or lower the levy if the estimated cost of either a reassessment of one or more groups of parcels under a county’s Plan or the performance of annual adjustments has changed.

The county assessor may petition the county fiscal body to increase the levy to pay for the costs of a reassessment of one or more groups of parcels under the county’s Plan, verification of sales disclosure forms, or processing annual adjustments. The assessor must document the needs and reasons for the increased funding. If the county fiscal body denies the petition, the assessor may appeal to the Department, which must hear the appeal and determine whether the additional levy is necessary.

The provisions of IC 6-1.1-4-28.5 and IC 6-1.1-4-29 remain in effect.

Interim Assessments (IC 6-1.1-4-30, as amended by Section 20 of SEA 19, effective January 1, 2013)

In making any assessment or reassessment of real property between reassessments under a county’s Plan, the rules, regulations, and standards for assessment are the same as those used in the preceding reassessment of that group of parcels. Additionally, since the assessment of the first group of properties for cyclical reassessment is scheduled to begin July 1, 2014, for the March 1, 2013 and March 1, 2014 assessment dates the county must still conduct an annual adjustment pursuant to IC 6-1.1-4-4.5 and 50 IAC 27.

County Assessor Equalization (IC 6-1.1-13-6, as amended by Section 30 of SEA 19, effective January 1, 2013)

A county assessor must inquire into the assessment of the classes of tangible property in the group of parcels under a county’s Plan after March 1 in the year in which the reassessment of tangible property in that group of parcels becomes effective. The assessor must make any changes, whether increases or decreases, in the assessed values that are necessary in order to equalize these values in that group. In addition, the assessor must determine the percent to be added to or deducted from the assessed values in order to make a just, equitable, and uniform equalization of assessments in that group.

The Midwest Estate, Tax & Business Planning Institute is June 7th and 8th


June 7-8, 2012
Indiana Convention Center & Lucas Oil Stadium
500 Ballroom

100 South Capitol Avenue

 Indianapolis, Indiana

12.75 CLE Hours / 1 Ethics Hour / 15.25 CPE / 12.75 Insurance CE Hours (Insurance CE Hours pending)

Level of Instruction - Intermediate to Advanced


Day 1 – June 7, 2012 (Thursday)

6.5 CLE, 1 Ethics Hour, 7.5 CPE, 6.5 Insurance CE (Insurance CE Hours pending)
8:25 A.M. Welcome & Introduction
Marc A. Hetzner, Co-Chair and MaryEllen K. Bishop, Co-Chair
8:30 A.M. The Year in Review: An Estate Planner’s Perspective on Recent Tax Developments
Howard M. Zaritsky
9:40 A.M. Coffee Break
9:50 A.M. The Year in Review: An Estate Planner’s Perspective on Recent Tax Developments (continued)
Howard M. Zaritsky
10:40 A.M. Coffee Break
11:05 A.M. Retirement Benefits in Trusts
- Vicki L. Anderson
12:05 P.M. Lunch (On Your Own)

1:15 P.M. Before TRA of 2010 Sunsets: Practical Estate Planning For The Next Six Months
- Jeffrey J. Radowich
2:20 P.M. Coffee Break
2:30 P.M. Before TRA of 2010 Sunsets: Practical Estate Planning For The Next Six Months (continued)
- Jeffrey J. Radowich
3:45 P.M. Coffee Break
3:55 P.M. Ethical Issues for Estate and Business Succession Planners
- Eric A. Manterfield
4:55 P.M. Adjournment

Day 2 - June 8, 2012 (Friday)

6.25 CLE, 7.5 CPE, 6.25 Insurance CE (Insurance CE Hours pending)
8:20 A.M. Welcome & Introduction
Marc A. Hetzner, Co-Chair and MaryEllen K. Bishop, Co-Chair
8:30 A.M. Qualified Personal Residence Trusts
- Natalie B. Choate
9:30 A.M. Coffee Break
9:40 A.M. The 194 Best & Worst Planning Ideas for Your Client’s Retirement Benefits: 
Over 194 Great, Not So Great, and Truly Terrible Ideas, Summarized and Rated.
- Natalie B. Choate
10:40 A.M. Coffee Break
10:50 A.M. NEW! IRAs with Hair: What to do with an IRA that has a shady past. - The world of IRA mistakes is like the children’s game “Chutes and Ladders.” Your client falls down the “chute” by making an IRA mistake. What IRS horrors await him? Before the IRS destroys your client’s retirement security, you need to find a “ladder” to bring the client’s IRA back up to the sunny skies of retirement heaven!
- Natalie B. Choate  
11:50 A.M. LUNCH (on your own)
1:00 P.M. Asset Protection Planning from A-Z: 26 Things to Think About Before Jumping In
- Lauren J. Wolven
2:05 P.M. Coffee Break
2:15 P.M. Funding Options for Long Term Care: Some Basic Parameters and a Review of the Current Status of Estate Recovery for Indiana Medicaid Benefits
- William J. Holwager
3:20 P.M. Coffee Break
3:30 P.M. Dementia Pathology and Assessment in Trust and Estate Litigation
- John A. Cremer
4:35 P.M. Adjournment

Appeals Filed in Tax Court in April


04/27/12 Indiana Finance Financial Corp. v. Indiana Department of Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-25
04/27/12 Indiana Finance Co. v. Indiana Department of Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-26
04/27/12 Real World Testing, LLC v. Indiana Department of State Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-27
04/27/12 Bingham McHale LLP now known as Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP v. Ind. Dept. of State Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-28
04/16/12 Carolyn Gibson v. Indiana Department of Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-20
04/16/12 Estate of Don H. Barden and Bella I. Barden v. Indiana Dept. of Revenue N/A 71T10-1204-TA-24
04/16/12 Ashutosh Corp. d/b/a Cloverdale Truck Plaza v. Indiana Dept. of Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-22
04/16/12 Macallister Machinery Co., Inc. v. Indiana Department of Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-21
04/16/12 Caterpillar, Inc. v. Indiana Dept. of Revenue N/A 49T10-1204-TA-23
04/02/12 Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation v. Department of Local Government Finance N/A 49T10-1203-TA-19

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/taxsumm.html

Recent Developments in Tax Sale Legislation

Meredith A. Devlin of the Law Firm of Bingham Greenbaum Doll LLP published an article on "Recent Developments in Indiana Real Estate Law," including the following excerpt on Tax Sales:

During the 2012 legislative session, the Indiana General Assembly made significant changes to the laws governing tax sale procedure. As a result, taxpayers now have the option of entering into an agreement with the county auditor for the repayment of delinquent real property taxes, an option that was previously only available to taxpayers in Lake County. Prior to this change, a county treasurer could accept partial payments, but the property could not be removed from the tax sale list unless the delinquency (including applicable penalties, interest and costs) was paid in full. Now, if a taxpayer enters into a written agreement with the auditor’s office that meets the guidelines of the statute, the property will not be included on the tax sale list. In order to take advantage of this option, the agreement must require the taxpayer to pay the delinquency prior to the end of the following June.

Additionally, the General Assembly also added a provision that allows the county treasurer to extend the redemption period for property not sold during the tax sale. In most cases, the redemption period is one year. The treasurer may grant an extension if the taxpayer and the treasurer enter into a mutually satisfactory repayment agreement before the redemption period expires. As long as the taxpayer does not default in making the payments required under the agreement, the taxpayer will have up to one year from the date of the agreement to redeem the property.

Finally, the General Assembly also added a new time-limited provision that allows the fiscal body of a county to adopt an ordinance to modify the minimum bid required to purchase real property at the tax sale. Prior to this addition, the treasurer could not accept a bid lower than the sum of the delinquent taxes, the corresponding interest and penalties and other costs. However, a county may now pass an ordinance that allows the treasurer to accept the lesser of:
  1. the aforementioned sum; or
  2. 75 percent of the gross assessed value of the property. 
To take advantage of this new provision, the ordinance must be passed before July 1 and it may only apply until July 1, 2013.

For the full article:

http://www.bgdlegal.com/pubs/xprPubDetail.aspx?xpST=PubDetail&pub=1167

(Thanks to The Indiana Law Blog (http://www.indianalawblog.com/) for the link)