A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, if it appears from the pleadings or other pleadings filed with the superior court that an action involves the imposition, assessment or collection of a tax, including all questions of law and fact relating to disputes about taxes, or the providing of tax decisions, arising under title 5, chapter 1, 2, 3 or 4, title 23, chapter 4 or 6 or title 20, 28, 42, 43 or 48, or disputes between political subdivisions of this state regarding taxes, except for criminal cases which involve any of the foregoing, the presiding judge of the superior court shall assign the action to the tax court. Actions involving appeals to the superior court concerning taxes imposed or collected by local jurisdictions shall also be assigned by the presiding judge to the tax court.
B. An action involving the imposition, assessment or collection of a tax, including questions of law or fact relating to a dispute about taxes, arising under title 42, chapters 11 through 16 may be filed in either the tax court or the superior court.
C. The supreme court shall adopt rules regarding the identification and assignment of actions to the tax court including a requirement that any action involving matters to be assigned to the tax court under subsection A of this section be identified as a tax court matter at the time of filing, by captioning the pleading "in the Arizona tax court".
D. If any order not amounting to a judgment has been entered by the superior court prior to assignment of the matter to the tax court, the tax court, on application of any party or on its own motion within thirty days after the assignment, may reconsider any order so entered.
Notes of Decisions
People's Choice TV Corp. v. City of Tucson, 46 P.3d 412 (Ariz. 2002).
· cites it 2× “PCTV protested the assessment and, after exhausting its administrative remedies, filed an action in the tax court pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-163. Both parties moved for summary judgment, and the tax court granted judgment in favor of PCTV, finding that § 42-6004 precluded the…”
Valencia v. Allen (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
· cites it 12× “” A.R.S. § 12-163(A) (emphasis added). As we next explain, this case fits every one of these criteria for the tax court’s jurisdiction.”
Mervyn's v. Superior Court, 879 P.2d 367 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 2× “AR.S. § 12-163(A). AR.S. section 12-164(A) provides that a superior court judge shall be assigned to the Tax Court by the presiding judge of Maricopa County Superior Court.”
U.S. Xpress, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 867 P.2d 869 (Ariz. T.C. 1994).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-163(A). This jurisdiction expressly encompasses, among others, taxes imposed under Title 28, including disputes regarding the Motor Carrier Tax found in AR.”
Desert Gardens v. Town of Quartzsite (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
“The Town audited Desert Gardens for the period from February 2006 through July 2007 and assessed transaction privilege tax of $44,716.61 plus interest.1 ¶3 After exhausting its administrative remedies, Desert Gardens filed a complaint in La Paz County superior court, which was…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-163(A) — 3 cases
Mervyn's v. Superior Court, 879 P.2d 367 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994).
“AR.S. § 12-163(A). AR.S. section 12-164(A) provides that a superior court judge shall be assigned to the Tax Court by the presiding judge of Maricopa County Superior Court.”
U.S. Xpress, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 867 P.2d 869 (Ariz. T.C. 1994).
“A.R.S. § 12-163(A). This jurisdiction expressly encompasses, among others, taxes imposed under Title 28, including disputes regarding the Motor Carrier Tax found in AR.”
Valencia v. Allen (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
“” A.R.S. § 12-163(A) (emphasis added). As we next explain, this case fits every one of these criteria for the tax court’s jurisdiction.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-163(A)(2015) — 1 case
Desert Gardens v. Town of Quartzsite (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
“The Town audited Desert Gardens for the period from February 2006 through July 2007 and assessed transaction privilege tax of $44,716.61 plus interest.1 ¶3 After exhausting its administrative remedies, Desert Gardens filed a complaint in La Paz County superior court, which was…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-163(B) — 1 case
Valencia v. Allen (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
“” A.R.S. § 12-163(A) (emphasis added). As we next explain, this case fits every one of these criteria for the tax court’s jurisdiction.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.