Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 42-18121 (2026)

Payment of subsequent taxes by certificate holder; separate certificate of purchase by assignment; fee

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. On or after June 1, if a person who holds a certificate of purchase desires to pay subsequent taxes, accrued interest and related fees due on the property, the person shall exhibit the certificate or receipt of registered certificate to the county treasurer. The treasurer shall enter the amount of the payment on the certificate and on the record of tax lien sales. The amount of subsequent taxes bears interest at the rate stated in the certificate of purchase from the first day of the month following the purchase of the subsequent tax lien. The county treasurer shall collect a fee of five dollars from the holder of the certificate for making the entries.

B. Beginning in calendar year 2016, on or after June 1 in a county with a population of more than three million persons if no prior year certificates of purchase are outstanding, if a person who holds a certificate of purchase for tax year 2014 and afterwards desires to pay subsequent taxes, the county treasurer shall issue a separate certificate of purchase by assignment for each subsequent year's taxes, accrued interest and related fees due on the property. The principal amount of each subsequent year's certificate of purchase bears interest at the rate stated in the original certificate of purchase exhibited by the person from the first day of the month following the purchase of the subsequent certificate. The treasurer shall collect a fee of five dollars for assignment of a certificate of purchase for each subsequent year. Except as provided by section 42-18201, subsection B, subsequent certificates of purchase by assignment carry the same foreclosure right as the original certificate of purchase, and partial payments shall be accepted by the treasurer as prescribed by section 42-18056, subsection C, by any party with a vested interest in the property.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2001–2019 · leading case: Span v. Maricopa, 437 P.3d 881 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Span v. Maricopa, 437 P.3d 881 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “See A.R.S. § 42-18121(A) (2019). The County argued that because the CP holder paid taxes due on Span's property for 1994, 1995 and 1996, making the last payment (for tax year 1996) on June 11, 1997, the lien "did not become eligible for expiration .”

Bauza Holdings, L.L.C. v. Primeco, Inc., 18 P.3d 132 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 5× “Bauza’s assignor later acquired that certificate and paid delinquent 1990 and 1993 taxes on the property, expanding its lien to encompass those taxes as permitted by A.R.S. § 42-18121. Meanwhile Primeco bought liens on the same property for tax years 1991,1992, and 1994 and…”

Sun Valley Fin. Servs. of Phoenix, L.L.C. v. Guzman, 134 P.3d 400 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 42-18121(A) (1999). . See generally A.”

Ulan v. Pima Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 145 P.3d 650 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “The Ulans also sought damages in connection with the reimbursement for subsequent taxes they paid under A.R.S. § 42-18121. Because the same method of calculating interest on the certificates applies to the interest chargeable on subsequent taxes, we do not separately analyze…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 42-18121(A) — 2 cases

Span v. Maricopa, 437 P.3d 881 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. § 42-18121(A) (2019). The County argued that because the CP holder paid taxes due on Span's property for 1994, 1995 and 1996, making the last payment (for tax year 1996) on June 11, 1997, the lien "did not become eligible for expiration .”

Sun Valley Fin. Servs. of Phoenix, L.L.C. v. Guzman, 134 P.3d 400 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). “See A.R.S. § 42-18121(A) (1999). . See generally A.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 42-18121(B) — 1 case

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.