Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 48-5-2 | Car Wreck Lawyer

TITLE 48 REVENUE AND TAXATION

Section 5. Ad Valorem Taxation of Property, 48-5-1 through 48-5-607.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

48-5-2. (For effective date, see note.) Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the term:

(.1) "Arm's length, bona fide sale" means a transaction which has occurred in good faith without fraud or deceit carried out by unrelated or unaffiliated parties, as by a willing buyer and a willing seller, each acting in his or her own self-interest, including but not limited to a distress sale, short sale, bank sale, or sale at public auction.

  1. "Current use value" of bona fide conservation use property means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property with the intention of continuing the property in its existing use and in an arm's length, bona fide sale and shall be determined in accordance with the specifications and criteria provided for in subsection (b) of Code Section 48-5-269.
  2. "Current use value" of bona fide residential transitional property means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property with the intention of continuing the property in its existing use and in an arm's length, bona fide sale.The tax assessor shall consider the following criteria, as applicable, in determining the current use value of bona fide residential transitional property:
    1. The current use of such property;
    2. Annual productivity; and
    3. Sales data of comparable real property with and for the same existing use.
  3. "Fair market value of property" means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm's length, bona fide sale. The income approach, if data are available, shall be utilized in determining the fair market value of income-producing property, and, if actual income and expense data are voluntarily supplied by the property owner, such data shall be considered in such determination. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, the transaction amount of the most recent arm's length, bona fide sale in any year shall be the maximum allowable fair market value for the next taxable year. With respect to the valuation of equipment, machinery, and fixtures when no ready market exists for the sale of the equipment, machinery, and fixtures, fair market value may be determined by resorting to any reasonable, relevant, and useful information available, including, but not limited to, the original cost of the property, any depreciation or obsolescence, and any increase in value by reason of inflation.Each tax assessor shall have access to any public records of the taxpayer for the purpose of discovering such information.
    1. In determining the fair market value of a going business where its continued operation is reasonably anticipated, the tax assessor may value the equipment, machinery, and fixtures which are the property of the business as a whole where appropriate to reflect the accurate fair market value.
    2. The tax assessor shall apply the following criteria in determining the fair market value of real property:
      1. Existing zoning of property;
      2. Existing use of property, including any restrictions or limitations on the use of property resulting from state or federal law or rules or regulations adopted pursuant to the authority of state or federal law;
      3. Existing covenants or restrictions in deed dedicating the property to a particular use;
      4. Bank sales, other financial institution owned sales, or distressed sales, or any combination thereof, of comparable real property;
      5. Decreased value of the property based on limitations and restrictions resulting from the property being in a conservation easement;
      6. Rent limitations, higher operating costs resulting from regulatory requirements imposed on the property, and any other restrictions imposed upon the property in connection with the property being eligible for any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Chapter 7 of this title or receiving any other state or federal subsidies provided with respect to the use of the property as residential rental property; provided, however, that properties described in this division shall not be considered comparable real property for the assessment or appeal of assessment of properties not covered by this division;
      7. (I) In establishing the value of any property subject to rent restrictions under the sales comparison approach, any income tax credits described in division (vi) of this subparagraph that are attributable to a property may be considered in determining the fair market value of the property, provided that the tax assessor uses comparable sales of property which, at the time of the comparable sale, had unused income tax credits that were transferred in an arm's length, bona fide sale.
    3. In establishing the value of any property subject to rent restrictions under the income approach, any income tax credits described in division (vi) of this subparagraph that are attributable to property may be considered in determining the fair market value of the property, provided that such income tax credits generate actual income to the record holder of title to the property; and
      1. Any other existing factors provided by law or by rule and regulation of the commissioner deemed pertinent in arriving at fair market value.

      (B.1) The tax assessor shall not consider any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Chapter 7 of this title in determining the fair market value of real property.

      (B.2) In determining the fair market value of real property, the tax assessor shall not include the value of any intangible assets used by a business, wherever located, including patents, trademarks, trade names, customer agreements, and merchandising agreements.

    4. Fair market value of "rehabilitated historic property" as such term is defined in subsection (a) of Code Section 48-5-7.2 means:
      1. For the first eight years in which the property is classified as "rehabilitated historic property," the value equal to the greater of the acquisition cost of the property or the appraised fair market value of the property as recorded in the county tax digest at the time preliminary certification on such property was received by the county board of tax assessors pursuant to subsection (c) of Code Section 48-5-7.2;
      2. For the ninth year in which the property is classified as "rehabilitated historic property," the value of the property as determined by division (i) of this subparagraph plus one-half of the difference between such value and the current fair market value exclusive of the provisions of this subparagraph; and
      3. For the tenth and following years, the fair market value of such property as determined by the provisions of this paragraph, excluding the provisions of this subparagraph.
    5. Fair market value of "landmark historic property" as such term is defined in subsection (a) of Code Section 48-5-7.3 means:
      1. For the first eight years in which the property is classified as "landmark historic property," the value equal to the greater of the acquisition cost of the property or the appraised fair market value of the property as recorded in the county tax digest at the time certification on such property was received by the county board of tax assessors pursuant to subsection (c) of Code Section 48-5-7.3;
      2. For the ninth year in which the property is classified as "landmark historic property," the value of the property as determined by division (i) of this subparagraph plus one-half of the difference between such value and the current fair market value exclusive of the provisions of this subparagraph; and
      3. For the tenth and following years, the fair market value of such property as determined by the provisions of this paragraph, excluding the provisions of this subparagraph.
    6. Timber shall be valued at its fair market value at the time of its harvest or sale in the manner specified in Code Section 48-5-7.5.
    7. Fair market value of "brownfield property" as such term is defined in subsection (a) of Code Section 48-5-7.6 means:
      1. Unless sooner disqualified pursuant to subsection (e) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, for the first ten years in which the property is classified as brownfield property, or as this period of preferential assessment may be extended pursuant to subsection (o) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, the value equal to the lesser of the acquisition cost of the property or the appraised fair market value of the property as recorded in the county tax digest at the time application was made to the Environmental Protection Division of the Department of Natural Resources for participation under Article 9 of Chapter 8 of Title 12, the "Georgia Brownfield Act," as amended; and
      2. Unless sooner disqualified pursuant to subsection (e) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, for the eleventh and following years, or at the end of any extension of this period of preferential assessment pursuant to subsection (o) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, the fair market value of such property as determined by the provisions of this paragraph, excluding the provisions of this subparagraph.
  4. "Foreign merchandise in transit" means personal property of any description which has been or will be moved by waterborne commerce through any port located in this state and:
    1. Which has entered the export stream, although temporarily stored or warehoused in the county where the port of export is located; or
    2. Which was shipped from a point of origin located outside the customs territory of the United States and on which United States customs duties are paid at or through any customs district or port located in this state, although stored or warehoused in the county where the port of entry is located while in transit to a final destination.
  5. "Forest land conservation value" of forest land conservation use property means the amount determined in accordance with the specifications and criteria provided for in Code Section 48-5-271 and Article VII, Section I, Paragraph III(f) of the Constitution.
  6. "Forest land fair market value" means the 2008 fair market value of the forest land; provided, however, that when the 2008 fair market value of the forest land has been appealed by a property owner and the ultimate fair market value of the forest land is changed in the appeal process by either the board of assessors, the board of equalization, a hearing officer, an arbitrator, or a superior court judge, then the final fair market value of the forest land shall replace the 2008 fair market value of the forest land. This final fair market value of the forest land shall be used in the calculation of local assistance grants. If local assistance grants have been granted to either a county, a county board of education, or a municipality based on the 2008 fair market value of forest land and subsequently the fair market value of such forest land is reduced on an appeal, then the county or the municipality shall reimburse the state, within 12 months unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, the difference between local assistance grants paid to the county or municipality and the amount which would have been due based on the final fair market value of the forest land. Such 2008 valuation may increase from one taxable year to the next by a rate equal to the percentage change in the price index for gross output of state and local government from the prior year to the current year as defined by the National Income and Product Accounts and determined by the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis and indicated by the Price Index for Government Consumption Expenditures and General Government Gross Output (Table 3.10.4).

(Ga. L. 1909, p. 36, § 22; Civil Code 1910, § 1004; Code 1933, § 92-5702; Ga. L. 1968, p. 358, § 1; Ga. L. 1969, p. 980, § 2; Ga. L. 1975, p. 96, § 1; Ga. L. 1978, p. 1950, § 1; Code 1933, § 91A-1001, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 309, § 2; Ga. L. 1979, p. 5, § 17; Ga. L. 1983, p. 716, § 1; Ga. L. 1989, p. 1585, § 1; Ga. L. 1990, p. 1122, § 1; Ga. L. 1990, p. 1869, § 1; Ga. L. 1991, p. 1903, § 2; Ga. L. 1992, p. 1008, § 1; Ga. L. 2001, p. 1098, § 1; Ga. L. 2003, p. 170, § 1; Ga. L. 2008, p. 297, § 1/HB 1211; Ga. L. 2009, p. 27, § 1/SB 55; Ga. L. 2010, p. 1104, §§ 5-1, 5-2, 5-3, 5-4/SB 346; Ga. L. 2012, p. 843, § 3/HB 1102; Ga. L. 2014, p. 672, § 1/HB 755; Ga. L. 2014, p. 820, § 1/HB 954; Ga. L. 2017, p. 55, § 1/HB 196; Ga. L. 2017, p. 774, § 48/HB 323; Ga. L. 2018, p. 119, §§ 1, 2/HB 85; Ga. L. 2018, p. 1112, § 48/SB 365.)

Delayed effective date.

- Ga. L. 2018, p. 119, § 7/HB 85, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: "(a) This Act shall become effective on January 1, 2019, only if an amendment to the Constitution of Georgia is ratified at the November, 2018, general election modifying constitutional prescriptions for forest land conservation use property and related assistance grants, permitting the withholding of a portion of assistance grants to provide for certain state administrative costs, and establishing qualified timberland property as a subclassification of tangible property for purposes of ad valorem taxation.

"(b) If such an amendment to the Constitution is not so ratified, then this Act shall not become effective and shall stand repealed by operation of law on January 1, 2019." This Code section, as set out above, does not reflect the amendment by that Act owing to the delayed effective date. If the amendment to the Constitution is ratified, this Code section will read as follows:

"As used in this chapter, the term:

"(.1) 'Arm's length, bona fide sale' means a transaction which has occurred in good faith without fraud or deceit carried out by unrelated or unaffiliated parties, as by a willing buyer and a willing seller, each acting in his or her own self-interest, including but not limited to a distress sale, short sale, bank sale, or sale at public auction.

"(1) 'Current use value' of bona fide conservation use property means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property with the intention of continuing the property in its existing use and in an arm's length, bona fide sale and shall be determined in accordance with the specifications and criteria provided for in subsection (b) of Code Section 48-5-269.

"(2) 'Current use value' of bona fide residential transitional property means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property with the intention of continuing the property in its existing use and in an arm's length, bona fide sale. The tax assessor shall consider the following criteria, as applicable, in determining the current use value of bona fide residential transitional property:

"(A) The current use of such property;

"(B) Annual productivity; and

"(C) Sales data of comparable real property with and for the same existing use.

"(3) 'Fair market value of property' means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm's length, bona fide sale. The income approach, if data are available, shall be utilized in determining the fair market value of income-producing property, and, if actual income and expense data are voluntarily supplied by the property owner, such data shall be considered in such determination. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, the transaction amount of the most recent arm's length, bona fide sale in any year shall be the maximum allowable fair market value for the next taxable year. With respect to the valuation of equipment, machinery, and fixtures when no ready market exists for the sale of the equipment, machinery, and fixtures, fair market value may be determined by resorting to any reasonable, relevant, and useful information available, including, but not limited to, the original cost of the property, any depreciation or obsolescence, and any increase in value by reason of inflation. Each tax assessor shall have access to any public records of the taxpayer for the purpose of discovering such information.

"(A) In determining the fair market value of a going business where its continued operation is reasonably anticipated, the tax assessor may value the equipment, machinery, and fixtures which are the property of the business as a whole where appropriate to reflect the accurate fair market value.

"(B) The tax assessor shall apply the following criteria in determining the fair market value of real property:

"(i) Existing zoning of property;

"(ii) Existing use of property, including any restrictions or limitations on the use of property resulting from state or federal law or rules or regulations adopted pursuant to the authority of state or federal law;

"(iii) Existing covenants or restrictions in deed dedicating the property to a particular use;

"(iv) Bank sales, other financial institution owned sales, or distressed sales, or any combination thereof, of comparable real property;

"(v) Decreased value of the property based on limitations and restrictions resulting from the property being in a conservation easement;

"(vi) Rent limitations, higher operating costs resulting from regulatory requirements imposed on the property, and any other restrictions imposed upon the property in connection with the property being eligible for any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Chapter 7 of this title or receiving any other state or federal subsidies provided with respect to the use of the property as residential rental property; provided, however, that properties described in this division shall not be considered comparable real property for the assessment or appeal of assessment of properties not covered by this division;

"(vii)(I) In establishing the value of any property subject to rent restrictions under the sales comparison approach, any income tax credits described in division (vi) of this subparagraph that are attributable to a property may be considered in determining the fair market value of the property, provided that the tax assessor uses comparable sales of property which, at the time of the comparable sale, had unused income tax credits that were transferred in an arm's length, bona fide sale.

"(II) In establishing the value of any property subject to rent restrictions under the income approach, any income tax credits described in division (vi) of this subparagraph that are attributable to property may be considered in determining the fair market value of the property, provided that such income tax credits generate actual income to the record holder of title to the property; and

"(viii) Any other existing factors provided by law or by rule and regulation of the commissioner deemed pertinent in arriving at fair market value.

"(B.1) The tax assessor shall not consider any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Chapter 7 of this title in determining the fair market value of real property.

"(B.2) In determining the fair market value of real property, the tax assessor shall not include the value of any intangible assets used by a business, wherever located, including patents, trademarks, trade names, customer agreements, and merchandising agreements.

"(C) Fair market value of 'historic property' as such term is defined in subsection (a) of Code Section 48-5-7.2 means:

"(i) For the first eight years in which the property is classified as 'rehabilitated historic property,' the value equal to the greater of the acquisition cost of the property or the appraised fair market value of the property as recorded in the county tax digest at the time preliminary certification on such property was received by the county board of tax assessors pursuant to subsection (c) of Code Section 48-5-7.2;

"(ii) For the ninth year in which the property is classified as 'rehabilitated historic property,' the value of the property as determined by division (i) of this subparagraph plus one-half of the difference between such value and the current fair market value exclusive of the provisions of this subparagraph; and

"(iii) For the tenth and following years, the fair market value of such property as determined by the provisions of this paragraph, excluding the provisions of this subparagraph.

"(D) Fair market value of 'landmark historic property' as such term is defined in subsection (a) of Code Section 48-5-7.3 means:

"(i) For the first eight years in which the property is classified as 'landmark historic property,' the value equal to the greater of the acquisition cost of the property or the appraised fair market value of the property as recorded in the county tax digest at the time certification on such property was received by the county board of tax assessors pursuant to subsection (c) of Code Section 48-5-7.3;

"(ii) For the ninth year in which the property is classified as 'landmark historic property,' the value of the property as determined by division (i) of this subparagraph plus one-half of the difference between such value and the current fair market value exclusive of the provisions of this subparagraph; and

"(iii) For the tenth and following years, the fair market value of such property as determined by the provisions of this paragraph, excluding the provisions of this subparagraph.

"(E) Timber shall be valued at its fair market value at the time of its harvest or sale in the manner specified in Code Section 48-5-7.5.

"(F) Fair market value of 'brownfield property' as such term is defined in subsection (a) of Code Section 48-5-7.6 means:

"(i) Unless sooner disqualified pursuant to subsection (e) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, for the first ten years in which the property is classified as brownfield property, or as this period of preferential assessment may be extended pursuant to subsection (o) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, the value equal to the lesser of the acquisition cost of the property or the appraised fair market value of the property as recorded in the county tax digest at the time application was made to the Environmental Protection Division of the Department of Natural Resources for participation under Article 9 of Chapter 8 of Title 12, the 'Georgia Brownfield Act,' as amended; and

"(ii) Unless sooner disqualified pursuant to subsection (e) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, for the eleventh and following years, or at the end of any extension of this period of preferential assessment pursuant to subsection (o) of Code Section 48-5-7.6, the fair market value of such property as determined by the provisions of this paragraph, excluding the provisions of this subparagraph.

"(G) Fair market value of 'qualified timberland property' means the fair market value determined in accordance with Article 13 of this chapter.

"(4) 'Foreign merchandise in transit' means personal property of any description which has been or will be moved by waterborne commerce through any port located in this state and:

"(A) Which has entered the export stream, although temporarily stored or warehoused in the county where the port of export is located; or

"(B) Which was shipped from a point of origin located outside the customs territory of the United States and on which United States customs duties are paid at or through any customs district or port located in this state, although stored or warehoused in the county where the port of entry is located while in transit to a final destination.

"(5) 'Forest land conservation use value' of forest land conservation use property means the amount determined in accordance with the specifications and criteria provided for in Code Section 48 5 271 and Article VII, Section I, Paragraph III(f) of the Constitution.

"(6) 'Forest land fair market value' means the fair market value of the forest land determined in accordance with Article VII, Section I, Paragraph III(f) of the Constitution."

The 2017 amendments. The first 2017 amendment, effective July 1, 2017, in the second sentence of paragraph (3), substituted "utilized" for "considered" near the middle and inserted ", and, if actual income and expense data are voluntarily supplied by the property owner, such data shall be considered in such determination" at the end; rewrote division (3)(B)(vi); added division (3)(B)(vii); and redesignated former division (3)(B)(vii) as present division (3)(B)(viii). The second 2017 amendment, effective May 9, 2017, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, revised language in paragraph (3), and, in division (3)(F)(i), revised punctuation and substituted "'Georgia Brownfield Act'" for "'Georgia Hazardous Site Reuse and Redevelopment Act'".

The 2018 amendments. The first 2018 amendment added subparagraph (3)(G), inserted "use" following "'Forestland conservation"' in paragraph (5), and rewrote paragraph (6). For effective date of this amendment, see the delayed effective date note. The second 2018 amendment, effective May 8, 2018, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, revised punctuation in subdivisions (3)(B)(vii)(I) and (3)(B)(vii)(II).

Code Commission notes.

- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 2010, a misspelling of "occurred" was corrected in paragraph (.1).

Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 2018, "rehabilitated" was inserted before "historic property" in subparagraph (4)(C).

Editor's notes.

- Ga. L. 1991, p. 1903, § 15, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that the amendment to this Code section shall be applicable beginning January 1, 1992, with respect to ad valorem taxation of timber and shall be applicable beginning January 1, 1992, for all other purposes. Taxation for prior periods shall continue to be governed by prior law.

Ga. L. 2008, p. 297, § 5/HB 1211, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that the 2008 amendment becomes effective on January 1, 2009, upon the ratification of a resolution at the November 2008, state-wide general election, which resolution amends the Constitution so as to provide for the special assessment and taxation of forest land conservation use property and for local government assistance grants. The constitutional amendment (Ga. L. 2008, p. 1209) was ratified at the general election held on November 4, 2008.

Ga. L. 2009, p. 27, § 5/SB 55, not codified by the General Assembly, provides, in part, that the amendment to this Code section shall be applicable to all taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2009.

Ga. L. 2017, p. 55, § 1/HB 196, which amended this Code section, purported to amend paragraph (3) but no changes were made to subparagraphs (B.1), (B.2), and (C) through (F).

Law reviews.

- For article discussing tax exemptions and deductions as incentives for establishment of foreign business in Georgia, see 27 Mercer L. Rev. 629 (1976). For article, "The Tax Abatement Program for Historic Properties in Georgia," see 28 Ga. St. B. J. 129 (1992). For annual survey on law of real property, see 43 Mercer L. Rev. 353 (1991). For annual survey on real property law, see 61 Mercer L. Rev. 301 (2009). For annual survey on real property, see 66 Mercer L. Rev. 151 (2014). For survey article on local government law, see 67 Mercer L. Rev. 147 (2015). For survey article on real property law, see 67 Mercer L. Rev. 193 (2015). For annual survey on local government law, see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 199 (2016). For annual survey of real property law, see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 231 (2016). For annual survey on local government law, see 69 Mercer L. Rev. 205 (2017). For note on the 1989 amendment to this Code section, see 6 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 173 (1989).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

General Consideration

Constitutionality of utilizing other methods for determining fair market value.

- Utilization of different methods for determining fair market value for purposes of taxation creates no infirmity under the United States Constitution or under the state constitution or laws. Dougherty County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Burt Realty Co., 250 Ga. 467, 298 S.E.2d 475, cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1208, 103 S. Ct. 3540, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1390 (1983).

Statute is not unconstitutional for vagueness of the term "fair market value of property." Chilivis v. Backus, 236 Ga. 88, 222 S.E.2d 371 (1976).

Section runs afoul of taxation uniformity provision of constitution.

- Inasmuch as O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(3)(B.1) exempted the low-income housing tax credits from consideration in determining the fair market value of the properties, the statute granted preferential treatment for ad valorem taxation purposes and created a subclass of tangible property other than as permitted by the State Constitution, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III (b), which ran afoul of the taxation uniformity provision. Heron Lake II Apts., L. P. v. Lowndes County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 299 Ga. 598, 791 S.E.2d 77 (2016).

Definition of "fair market value of property" is not too vague and indefinite to be enforced. Chilivis v. Kell, 236 Ga. 226, 223 S.E.2d 117, cert. denied, 429 U.S. 891, 97 S. Ct. 249, 50 L. Ed. 2d 174 (1976).

Constitutionality of the term "fair market value of property."

- Term "fair market value of property" as defined in this statute is not too vague and indefinite to be enforced, and there is no merit in the constitutional attacks on county ad valorem tax assessments statutes because of their use of this term. Butts County v. Briscoe, 236 Ga. 233, 223 S.E.2d 199 (1976).

Fair market value.

- Because "fair market value of property" was not defined as the amount a buyer would pay to purchase, and a willing seller would accept, for a defeasable interest in property; the appellate court concluded the tax sale did not qualify as an arm's length, bona fide sale such that the one-year freeze applied and, thus, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to the Newton County Board of Tax Assessors, and in denying the buyers' cross-motion on that ground. Ballard v. Newton County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 332 Ga. App. 521, 773 S.E.2d 780 (2015).

Highest and best use may be considered.

- In assessing the fair market value of real property, tax assessors may, when appropriate, consider the "highest and best use" of real property under the statutory criterion allowing "[A]ny other factors deemed pertinent in arriving at a fair market value." Sibley v. Cobb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 171 Ga. App. 65, 318 S.E.2d 643 (1984).

Applicability of 1979 amendment.

- Change made by Ga. L. 1979, p. 5, § 17, is not to the tax year 1979 but to tax years 1980 and thereafter. Monroe County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Remick, 165 Ga. App. 616, 300 S.E.2d 203 (1983).

Simultaneous application of local Act homestead exemption was not precluded.

- Although an owner's property qualified for preferential assessment under the Rehabilitated Historic Property Preferential Assessment Act (RHPPA), O.C.G.A. § 48-5-7.2, the owner was allowed to use the effective date of the local Act homestead exemption, Ga. L. 1999, p. 4213, § 1, as the base year for the fair market valuation assessment of the property because the simultaneous application of the RHPPA and the local Act homestead exemption was not precluded. Chatham County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Bock, 299 Ga. App. 257, 682 S.E.2d 355 (2009).

"Foreign merchandise in transit."

- Imported stone tile/slab, which was stored at the taxpayer's pleasure for sale to anyone who might wish to purchase it, was not "in transit to a final destination" within the contemplation of subparagraph (4)(B) of O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2 and was consequently not exempt from ad valorem taxation under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-5. Seabrook Corp. v. Chatham County Bd. of Equalization, 195 Ga. App. 730, 394 S.E.2d 796 (1990).

Merchandise brought into the United States through the port of Charleston, South Carolina and transported, via land freight carrier to a container freight station in Chatham County, was not "foreign merchandise in transit" and was therefore not exempt from ad valorem taxation. Pier 1 Imports v. Chatham County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 199 Ga. App. 294, 404 S.E.2d 637 (1991).

Construction of O.C.G.A.

§ 48-5-2(3) with local constitutional amendment. - Trial court properly determined that no conflict existed between a local constitutional amendment (LCA) and O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(3) because the statute focused on the market-determined value of property on the actual date the property was acquired, rather than the property's value as much as a year later and was entirely consistent with the LCA, which froze the ad valorem tax value of homestead property in the county at the property's fair market value at the start of the year after a homestead exemption was allowed or after ownership of the property changed. Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Yeoman, 293 Ga. 107, 744 S.E.2d 18 (2013).

Trial court is correct in disregarding valuation placed on property by board of tax assessors when the chairperson concedes that the chairperson has no knowledge of the existing use of the property, that the existing zoning is not indicative of any use to which the property might reasonably be put, and that the chairperson knows of no other factors, other than the property's general location, which might be pertinent in determining the amount the property would bring at a cash sale. Evans v. Board of Tax Assessors, 168 Ga. App. 792, 310 S.E.2d 562 (1983).

No distinction between property owned by public utility corporations and individuals. Ogletree v. Woodward, 150 Ga. 691, 105 S.E. 243 (1920).

Duty to return all property at fair market value is a statutory mandate.

- Provision requiring that all property be returned for taxation at the property's fair market value is, undeniably, a statutory mandate. McLennan v. Undercofler, 222 Ga. 302, 149 S.E.2d 705 (1966).

Duty to return all property at fair market value is not supreme, but yields to the duty to avoid discrimination. McLennan v. Undercofler, 222 Ga. 302, 149 S.E.2d 705 (1966); Griggs v. Greene, 230 Ga. 257, 197 S.E.2d 116 (1973).

Construction of "existing use of property."

- Term "existing use of property" as used in the definition of "fair market value of property" cannot be assigned any particular value since real property is unique and the extent to which existing use affects the property's value is dependent upon a great variety of other factors. Cobb County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Sibley, 244 Ga. 404, 260 S.E.2d 313 (1979).

Construction with other law.

- Assessments lacked uniformity in failing to follow the mandates of O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2 regarding consideration of "existing use of the property" and "other factors deemed pertinent in arriving at fair market value" and in failing to exempt standing timber under the mandate of O.C.G.A. §§ 48-5-7.1(a)(1) and48-5-7.5 as set forth in Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III. Leverett v. Jasper County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 233 Ga. App. 470, 504 S.E.2d 559 (1998).

"Bona fide sale" included sale by Freddie Mac at a loss.

- Trial court erred in concluding that a 2011 sale of taxable property by Freddie Mac did not qualify as an arm's length, bona fide sale for purposes of limiting the assessment value of the property in the next year under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(3); O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(.1) expressly defined a bona fide sale to include distress transactions. CPF Invs., LLLP v. Fulton County Bd. of Assessors, 330 Ga. App. 744, 769 S.E.2d 159 (2015).

Arm's length bona fide sale occurred at sheriff's sale.

- Trial court erred by determining that the sheriff's sale of certain real property was not an arm's length, bona fide sale under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(3) because the sheriff's sale of the subject property was a distress sale and public auction; thus, it was an arm's length, bona fide sale under the plain terms of § 48-5-2(.1). Park Solutions, LLC v. DeKalb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 336 Ga. App. 832, 783 S.E.2d 453 (2016).

Discrepancies in tax evaluation assessment.

- Bankruptcy court found that for the purposes of ad valorem tax on the debtors' equipment that: (1) for 1997, the value was the lowest of the tax assessors' value due to discrepancies in the tax assessors' values; (2) for 1998, the court accepted the value determined by the board of equalization which gave some weight to the debtors' appraiser who considered comparable sales; (3) for 1999, the court took the tax assessors' lowest value as the debtors' appraiser omitted a laser device; and (4) for 2000, the debtors did not challenge the tax assessors' value. In re R-P Packaging, Inc., 278 Bankr. 281 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 2002).

Cited in Williamson v. DeKalb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 168 Ga. App. 47, 308 S.E.2d 55 (1983); Hawkins v. Grady County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 180 Ga. App. 834, 350 S.E.2d 790 (1986); Hawkins v. Grady County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 192 Ga. App. 416, 385 S.E.2d 305 (1989); Coleman v. Montgomery County, 228 Ga. App. 276, 491 S.E.2d 495 (1997); Jones v. Chatham County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 270 Ga. App. 483, 606 S.E.2d 673 (2004).

Factors to Be Considered

Existing use of property is not exclusive factor in determining fair market value; assessors are directed to consider also existing zoning of property, existing covenants or restrictions in the deed dedicating the property to a particular use, or any other factors deemed pertinent in arriving at a fair market value. Cobb County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Sibley, 244 Ga. 404, 260 S.E.2d 313 (1979).

Existing use must be employed as a yardstick with which to measure fair market value. Inland Container Corp. v. Paulding County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 220 Ga. App. 878, 470 S.E.2d 702 (1996), overruled on other grounds by Gilmer County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Spence, 309 Ga. App. 482, 711 S.E.2d 51(2011).

Sufficiency of evidence that assessors failed to consider existing use of property in valuation.

- Evidence is sufficient to support the judgment of the trial court that assessors failed to consider the existing use of land which is generally categorized as vacant land, not commercial, industrial, or residential subdivision, when assessors, relying on the property's highest and best use, assigned such land a base value according to the district in which the land was located, which value was determined by the sale price of other vacant lands purchased for development, which sales did not accurately reflect the value of other vacant land because such sales were often for special purposes such as schools or parks, or speculative development. Cobb County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Sibley, 244 Ga. 404, 260 S.E.2d 313 (1979).

"Other pertinent factors" should be considered only after factors listed in section.

- It is error for a court to approve a valuation which tilts market value in favor of an assumed highest and best use to appear from future speculation and development, rather than first determining the criteria for zoning, existing use, and deed restrictions, if any, at which time other pertinent factors may be considered. Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 155 Ga. App. 557, 271 S.E.2d 691 (1980); Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 161 Ga. App. 257, 287 S.E.2d 696 (1982).

Intent as to use of "highest and best use" as factor in valuation.

- While under the criterion "any other factors deemed pertinent" the highest and best use may be considered, the General Assembly did not base market value on highest and best use, nor did the General Assembly list highest and best use as a specific criterion. Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 155 Ga. App. 557, 271 S.E.2d 691 (1980).

"Highest and best use" is factor only if it reflects amount realized from cash sale of the property. That valuation will not be confined to actual use alone, and all criteria added by the General Assembly are to be considered. Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 155 Ga. App. 557, 271 S.E.2d 691 (1980).

"Highest and best use" is a much more speculative assigned value than existing use. Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 155 Ga. App. 557, 271 S.E.2d 691 (1980).

Valuation of income-producing property by income capitalization method.

- In considering existing use, when the use is income producing, it would appear that the income capitalization method should at least be considered, this being a standard method of arriving at value. Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 155 Ga. App. 557, 271 S.E.2d 691 (1980).

Method for fixing fair market value of leaseholds.

- In fixing the fair market value of a leasehold for tax purposes, the rule of "fair market value of property" should always be applied. Delta Air Lines v. Coleman, 219 Ga. 12, 131 S.E.2d 768, cert. denied, 375 U.S. 904, 84 S. Ct. 195, 11 L. Ed. 2d 145 (1963).

Valuation of separate taxable interests when tax liability divided among owners.

- Existence of separate taxable interests and estates in the same property and determination of their respective fair market values for assessment purposes is necessary only when the tax liability is likewise divided among the owners. Martin v. Liberty County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 152 Ga. App. 340, 262 S.E.2d 609 (1979).

Valuation of leases.

- Assessed value must consider, inter alia: existing zoning, existing use, and "any other factors deemed pertinent in arriving at fair market value." Therefore, a consideration of "existing use" (the current leases) must be employed as a "'yardstick' with which to measure fair market value" not hypothetical non-existing leases. Dougherty County Bd. of Equalization v. Castro Dev. Co., 228 Ga. App. 293, 491 S.E.2d 483 (1997).

Valuation of dairy farm cannot be based on sales for speculative or development purposes.

- When the assessed value of rural acreage used as a dairy farm is based primarily on sales of other property, and all the so-called comparable sales are for speculative or development purposes, with the exception of one which was intended for use as a private airport, the statutory formula has not been properly applied. Dotson v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 155 Ga. App. 557, 271 S.E.2d 691 (1980).

Club membership's relevancy to valuation of property.

- Although the taxpayers' memberships in a club were not subject to taxation, if a taxpayer relinquished that membership upon sale of the taxpayer's real estate, the buyer could apply for immediate membership, and such an application would normally be granted. Therefore, a county board of tax assessors would have violated Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III and O.C.G.A. § 48-5-1 if the board excluded the enhanced value of the properties attributable to the right to apply for such memberships from ad valorem taxation because the membership was part of the properties' fair market value. Morton v. Glynn County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 294 Ga. App. 901, 670 S.E.2d 528 (2008).

Use of a "value in use in place" standard was not an inappropriate method of determining the fair market value of machinery and equipment for taxation purposes. Flambeau Corp. v. Morgan County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 238 Ga. App. 812, 520 S.E.2d 275 (1999).

Federal tax credits considered.

- Prior to the statutory amendment contained in O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(3)(B.1), tax credits under 26 U.S.C. § 42 were properly considered in establishing the fair market value of real estate for property tax purposes. Pine Pointe Hous., L.P. v. Lowndes County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 254 Ga. App. 197, 561 S.E.2d 860 (2002).

Historic properties.

- O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2(3)(C) defines "fair market value" of property classified as rehabilitated historic property under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-7.2 and sets forth the same test to be used when the county tax receiver or tax commissioner enters the basis or value of a parcel of rehabilitated historic property; thus, § 48-5-7.2 did not require that both the rehabilitation process and the Department of Natural Resources final certification process be completed within the two-year period before the owner may have applied for and obtained preferential assessment for the property and a tax board's argument that the board had no value upon which to base the preferential assessment whenever the owner allows the preliminary assessment to lapse upon expiration of the two-year rehabilitation period was without merit. Chatham County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Emmoth, 278 Ga. 144, 598 S.E.2d 495 (2004).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Tax commissioner may legitimately inquire into the cost, depreciation, age, and use of property which is subject to taxation for purposes of investigating the property's fair market value. This does not mean that property is to be returned or assessed for taxation at other than the property's fair market value; nor does it mean property should be assessed at book value rather than fair market value, although in many cases, fair market value may, in fact, be identical with book value. 1963-65 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 113.

Earnings as an element of fair market value of property.

- Formula taking earnings into consideration may be used in arriving at the fair market value of property of a public service corporation; the formula used should not be considered conclusive but be used merely as a guide. 1965-66 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 66-12.

Duty of county tax assessors to periodically update property valuations.

- If the fair market value of property increases every two years, then it is the duty of the county tax assessors to increase the valuation of property for tax purposes every two years. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-504.

Applicability to 1990 and 1991 tax years.

- Neither subsection (1)(E) (now subparagraph (3)(E) ) nor § 48-5-33 (repealed) applies to the 1990 tax year. With respect to the 1991 tax year, absent further constitutional amendment or action by the General Assembly, § 48-5-33 (repealed) governs over subsection (1)(E) to the extent they are inconsistent. 1990 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 90-17.

Administrative caps on assistance grants prohibited.

- Because neither Ga. Const. 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Para. III nor the Forest Land Protection Act, O.C.G.A. § 48-5-7.7, authorize or contemplate a cap on assistance grants based on the total exemption value of forest land conservation use property, the Department of Revenue would not be authorized to impose an administrative cap on assistance grants issued pursuant to the Forest Land Protection Act of 2008 in the manner proposed. 2016 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 16-5.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- Taxes: valuing undeveloped mining property as prospect, 2 A.L.R. 1550.

Assessment of corporate property at full value according to law when valuations generally are illegally fixed lower, 3 A.L.R. 1370; 28 A.L.R. 983; 55 A.L.R. 503.

Prospective value as basis of valuation of land for purposes of property taxation, 24 A.L.R. 649.

Method or rule for valuation of leasehold interest for purpose of property taxation, 84 A.L.R. 1310.

Rights appurtenant, easements, restrictions, or charges in respect of land as factors in assessment of real property for property taxation, 108 A.L.R. 829.

Valuation of property for purpose of taxation as affected by variation of tax rates for local or special purposes in different local taxing units, or inclusion of property within particular taxing unit, 119 A.L.R. 1300.

Easement as factor in property taxation, 134 A.L.R. 963.

Discretion of court or referee as to mode of valuation of real property for tax purposes, 152 A.L.R. 611.

Application of "blockage rule" or "blockage discount theory" in determining stock valuation, for purposes of taxation of intangibles, 33 A.L.R.2d 607.

Income or rental value as a factor in evaluation of real property for purposes of taxation, 96 A.L.R.2d 666.

Separate assessment and taxation of air rights, 56 A.L.R.3d 1300.

Situs of tangible personal property for purposes of property taxation, 2 A.L.R.4th 432.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 48-5-2

Total Results: 9  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Nat'l Health Network, Inc. v. Fulton Cnty., 514 S.E.2d 422 (Ga. 1999).

Cited 13 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 15, 1999 | 270 Ga. 724, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 1051

...26 using correct procedures, did not take into account matters which the taxpayer believes should have been considered" in determining the assessed value. [27] We reject the argument that a county's alleged failure to consider factors listed in OCGA § 48-5-2 that are relevant to fair market value makes the assessed value "factually inaccurate" as that term is used in Gwinnett I....
...[25] See Cleveland Elec. Illuminating Co. v. Collins, 48 Ohio St.2d 233, 357 N.E.2d 1101 (1976) (refund authorized when county auditor erroneously listed property's assessed value at $973,390, rather than the correct figure of $97,340). [26] See OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B) (listing factors tax assessor shall consider in determining fair market value)....
Copy

Dougherty Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Burt Realty Co., 250 Ga. 467 (Ga. 1983).

Cited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 4, 1983 | 298 S.E.2d 475

...Benson-Corwin, Inc. v. Cobb County School *469District, 239 Ga. 199, 200 (236 SE2d 361) (1977). Furthermore, the law provides that: “All property shall be returned for taxation at its fair market value.” OCGA § 48-5-6 (Code Ann. § 91A-1007); see OCGA § 48-5-2 (Code Ann....
Copy

Heron Lake II Apts., Lp v. Lowndes Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 306 Ga. 816 (Ga. 2019).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 23, 2019

...qualifying low-income building. See 26 USC §§ 38 (b) (1), 42 (a) (1), (2). As explained below, we conclude that the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to decide this case, and that LIHTCs do not constitute “actual income” for purposes of OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II). Moreover, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II) do not run afoul of the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Par. III (a).2 Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court. 1. OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) defines the phrase “[f]air market value of property” for purposes of ad valorem real property taxation as “the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm’s length, bona fide sale.” The statute then specifies when certain approaches to valuation are to be used and certain criteria that must or may be used in making the valuation. See OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B). The General Assembly has repeatedly revised OCGA § 48-5-2 (3), and, in 2 “All taxes shall be levied and collected under general laws and for public purposes only....
...provision of the Georgia Constitution. This Court affirmed that order in Heron Lake II Apts. v. Lowndes County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 3 As discussed below, in Heron Lake II Apts. v. Lowndes County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 299 Ga. 598, 610 (791 SE2d 77) (2016), we held OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) unconstitutional for violating the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision. And even though the General Assembly amended OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) in both 2017 and 2019, subsection (B.1) still appears in the Georgia Code. 3 299 Ga....
...d OCGA § 48-5- 2 (3). See Ga. L. 2017, p. 55, § 1. The amendment changed the second sentence of paragraph (3) to mandate the consideration of data provided by the property owner, and added a new division (vii) to subparagraph (B). The new OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) is further subdivided, and says, with emphasis supplied: (I) In establishing the value of any property subject to rent restrictions under the sales comparison approach, any income tax credits described i...
...ty may be considered in determining the fair market value of the property, provided that such income tax credits generate actual income to the record holder of title to the property. ... Moreover, the 2017 amendment rewrote OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vi) to provide that in determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties, tax assessors shall apply, among other things, the following criterion: Rent limitations, higher operating costs resulting from...
...as residential rental property; provided, however, that properties described in this division shall not be considered comparable real property for the assessment or appeal of assessment of properties not covered by this division. . . .4 4 Former OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vi) said: Rent limitations, operational requirements, and any other 6 Finally, the amendment redesignated former OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) as OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (viii), and that provision says that in determining the fair market value of real property, tax assessors shall also consider “[a]ny other existing factors provided by law or by rule and regulation of the commissioner [of reven...
...uniformity provision. The Board also asked the trial court to interpret the 2017 amendment to allow LIHTCs to continue to be treated as regular income. In a November 9, 2018 Final Order, the trial court cited Heron Lake I and Pine Pointe and declared OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I), which addresses the sales comparison approach, unconstitutional for violating the taxation uniformity provision. The trial court also held that LIHTCs could be considered “actual income” under OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II)’s income approach and, alternatively, that OCGA §48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II) would violate our Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision if it were read to exempt LIHTCs from being considered as “actual income.” On appeal, Appellants raise the following three enumerations of error...
...the Appellants’ properties for the 2018 tax year; (2) the trial court 8 erred in finding that LIHTCs were “actual income” rather than offsets against tax liability; and (3) the trial court erred in declaring OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II) unconstitutional, given the General Assembly’s power to forbid the use of improper appraisal methods....
...Accordingly, the trial court had jurisdiction to rule on the Board’s petition pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act. 3. Appellants also claim that the trial court erred in concluding that Section 42 Tax Credits constitute “actual income” under OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II)’s income approach, because those credits merely offset Section 42 property owners and investors’ individual tax liability....
...We agree. To recap the statutory scheme at issue here, OCGA § 48-5-6 11 mandates that, subject to certain exceptions not at issue here, all taxable real property “shall be returned for taxation at its fair market value.” OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) defines “fair market value” and provides a list of several criteria that tax assessors “shall apply . . . in determining the fair market value of property.” As relevant here, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vi) requires tax assessors to consider “[r]ent limitations . . . and any other restrictions imposed upon the property in connection with the property being eligible for” Section 42 Tax Credits. In the wake of our decision in Heron Lake I, the General Assembly added OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II), which tell tax assessors how they can use the sales comparison and income approaches in determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties. OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II) provides that, when establishing the fair market value of Section 42 properties under the income approach, tax assessors may consider LIHTCs attributable to those properties, “provided that” the LIHTCs “generate actual income to the record holder of title. . . .” 12 For starters, in deciding whether the trial court erred in concluding that LIHTCs can be counted as “actual income” under OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II)’s income approach, “we first look to the text ....
...t natural and reasonable way, as an ordinary speaker of the English language would.” Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Loudermilk, 305 Ga. 558, 562 (1) (826 SE2d 116) (2019) (citations and punctuation omitted). Here, a plain text reading of OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II) demonstrates that the trial court failed to construe the statutory phrase “actual income” in the “most natural and reasonable way,” because LIHTCs do not provide recipients of those credits with “actual income.” Loudermilk, supra....
...As such, we decline to read OCGA § 48-5- 2 (3) (B) (vii) (II)’s phrase “actual income” to include LIHTCs, because they merely reduce investors’ individual tax liabilities.5 Our conclusion that LIHTCs do not constitute “actual income” for the purpose of OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II) is consistent with the persuasive reasoning of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Randall v....
... other sources, thereby reducing the investor’s overall income tax burden. In short, contrary to the Board’s contention and the trial court’s ruling, we can see no reasonable way in which to construe the phrase “actual income” in OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II) to include LIHTCs. The financial benefit realized by an owner of a property interest in a Section 42 property is a reduction in his or her overall tax liability — i.e., a tax credit. That benefit does not constitute “actual income” under OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II).6 Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s conclusion to the contrary. 4. Appellants assert that the trial court erred in declaring both OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II) unconstitutional, because, in passing the 2017 amendment, the General Assembly appropriately exercised its authority to limit the use of improper appraisal methods, and neither provision precludes tax assessors from 6 Courts in other states agree....
...The General Assembly has passed legislation which provides that, subject to some exceptions not at issue in this case, all property subject to ad valorem taxation in Georgia “shall be returned for taxation at its fair market value. . . .” OCGA § 48-5-6.7 And as discussed above, in the 2017 amendment to OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B), the General Assembly defined the contours of at least two approaches that assessors may use to establish the fair market 7 OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) defines the “fair market value of property” as “the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm’s length, bona fide sale,” and says that “[t]he income approach, if data are available, shall be utilized in determining the fair market value of income-producing property . . . .” 18 value of Section 42 properties: the sales comparison approach, see OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I), and the income approach, see OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II)....
...the fair market value of Section 42 properties, the General Assembly had effectively placed those properties in a distinct subclass of property for taxation purposes, which violated our Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision. See id. (citing OCGA § 48-5-2 (3)). Here, unlike in Heron Lake I, we must review the trial court’s rulings on two statutory provisions that do not preclude tax assessors from considering LIHTCs when they determine the fair 19 market value of Section 42 properties....
...e are neither arbitrary nor unreasonable. Rather, they are reasonable approaches for tax assessors to use in carrying out their complex duty of computing the fair market value of Section 42 property. As for the sales comparison approach, in OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I), the General Assembly reasonably limited that approach to situations in which the property being assessed could be most fairly compared to sales of other Section 42 properties with unused tax credits....
...2018) (noting that the value of Section 42 properties is unique because of impediments federal regulations place on those properties, and concluding it would not be appropriate to compare those properties with economically dissimilar unregulated commercial property). 23 OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) may provide assessors with a methodology that is appropriate in the future, and we decline to speculate that a sale of a Section 42 property with unused LIHTCs will never occur. For those reasons, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I)’s sales comparison approach is not arbitrary or unreasonable. See DeKalb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 248 Ga. at 281 (3). With respect to the income approach, consistent with our conclusion above — that LIHTCs as currently structured do not constitute “actual income” for the purposes of OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II) — we agree that this method has a narrow range of potential applications....
...the taxpayer rather than merely reducing her tax liability. Cf. OCGA § 48-7-40.36 (g) (1) 24 (providing refundable income tax credits to timber farmers impacted by Hurricane Michael). And for those reasons, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (II)’s income approach is not arbitrary or unreasonable. See DeKalb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 248 Ga. at 281 (3). Thus, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II) are not unconstitutional, because they do not completely preclude tax assessors from considering LIHTCs in determining fair market value; rather, they simply limit the applicability of the sales comparison and income approaches....
...where they can be accurately and fairly applied based upon reliable data. Finally, we also note that, in determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties, tax assessors are not limited to using either the sales comparison or income approaches. For example, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (viii) directs tax assessors to apply — among other 25 criteria — “[a]ny other existing factors provided by law or by rule and regulation of the commissioner [of revenue]” when determining the fair market value of real property....
...both the Appraisal Foundation and the International Association of Assessing Officers, so long as those practices are consistent with the Appraisal Procedures Manual and Georgia law. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 560-11-10-.01 (4). In short, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II) do not violate our Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision, nor are they arbitrary or unreasonable. Moreover, tax assessors have alternative methods of assessing the fair market value of Section 42 properties. Therefore, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vii) (I) and (II) are not unconstitutional, and we reverse the judgment of the trial court. Judgment reversed....
Copy

Heron Lake II Apts., L.P. v. Lowndes Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 299 Ga. 598 (Ga. 2016).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Sep 12, 2016 | 791 S.E.2d 77

...et al. v. LOWNDES COUNTY BOARD OF TAX ASSESSORS. HINES, Presiding Justice. This is an appeal by the owners of residential rental properties in Lowndes County from a final order of the superior court declaring that OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1),1 which excludes low-income housing income tax credits from consideration for the purpose of assessing ad valorem tax, is unconstitutional as violating the taxation uniformity provision of the Georgia Constitution, Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VII, Sec. I, Par. III (a) (“taxation uniformity provision”).2 1 OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) provides: The tax assessor shall not consider any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenu...
...use the tax credits to reduce their individual income tax liabilities. On March 25, 2015, the Lowndes County Board of Tax Assessors (the “Assessors”) filed in the Superior Court of Lowndes County a petition for declaratory judgment as to the constitutionality of OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1), which precluded the Assessors from considering the tax credits in determining the fair market value of the real property at issue, as of January 1, 2015. As noted, the superior court declared OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) to be unconstitutional as running afoul of the taxation uniformity provision, and affected property owners have filed the present appeal from the adverse ruling. Again, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B. l) prohibits the tax assessor from 8 considering tax credits in determining the fair market value of real property.4 Yet, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vi),5 as amended in 2014, provides, in determining the fair market value of real property, that the tax assessor is to apply rental limitations, operational requirements, and other restrictions imposed on a property in connection with the property being eligible for any income tax 4 OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) provides: “Fair market value of property” means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm's length, bona fide sale....
...the original cost of the property, any depreciation or obsolescence, and any increase in value by reason of inflation. Each tax assessor shall have access to any public records of the taxpayer for the purpose of discovering such information. 5 OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vi) states in full that in determining the fair market value of real property, the tax assessor shall apply: (vi) Rent limitations, operational requirements, and any other restrictions imposed upon the property in co...
...bed in subparagraph (B.1) of this paragraph shall not be considered comparable real property for assessment or appeal of assessment of other properties[.] 9 credits described in OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B. l). Consequently, as the superior court stated, the issue is whether, given OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B) (vi), as amended in 2014, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) violates the uniformity requirement of Ga. Const....
...“‘Real estate’ means the physical parcel of land, improvements to the land, improvements attached 6 Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 560-11-10-.01provides: (1) Purpose. This appraisal procedures manual has been developed in accordance with Code section 48-5-269.1 which directs the Revenue Commissioner to adopt by rule, subject to Chapter 13 of Title 50, the “Georgia Administrative Procedure Act,”and maintain an appropriate procedural manual for use by the county property...
...Lowndes County Board of Tax Assessors, 254 Ga. App. 197 (561 SE2d 860) (2002), “Section 42 tax credits provide a . . . stream of value tied solely to the property.” Id. at 200 (1) (b). Although the Court of Appeals determined that it was inappropriate to retroactively apply OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) to the underlying controversy in Pine Pointe Housing, much of the analysis in the case in regard to ad valorem tax valuation is apposite here. In 1996, Pine Pointe Housing, a limited partnership, constructed a 71- unit...
...credits was inconsistent with the APM; that the tax credits could not be 14 considered income for accounting purposes; that the superior court's ruling was inconsistent with principles established by case law; and that OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1), which was effective as of July 1, 2001, prohibited consideration of the tax credits. As the Court of Appeals explained, generally real property is taxed according to its fair market value, and the General Assembly has defined fair market value as “the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm's length, bona fide sale.” OCGA § 48-5-2 (3), supra at n....
...Indeed, to conclude otherwise would bar from consideration a property right which plainly affects the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay and a 18 willing seller would accept in a sale, thus, effectively nullifying the statutory definition of fair market value. See OCGA § 48-5-2 (3), supra at n. 4. Simply, inasmuch as OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) exempts these income tax credits from consideration in determining the fair market value of the properties at issue, the statute grants preferential treatment for ad valorem taxation purposes and creates a subclass of tangible property other than as permitted by the State Constitution....
...This runs afoul of the taxation uniformity provision.10 Blevins v. Dade County Bd. of Tax Assessors, supra at 114 (1). Consequently, the judgment of the superior court stands. Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur. 10 That OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (B.1) violates the taxation uniformity provision was implicitly recognized by the General Assembly when it proposed the following 2002 amendment to the Georgia Constitution that would have authorized an exception to the uniformity requirement of Ga....
Copy

Legacy Inv. Grp., LLC v. Kenn, 621 S.E.2d 453 (Ga. 2005).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Oct 24, 2005 | 279 Ga. 778, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 3197

...roperty in an arms-length transaction and obtained the best price possible. On summary judgment, construing the evidence most favorably to Legacy, this evidence may create an issue of fact that Legacy did not pay a premium for its property. See OCGA § 48-5-2(3) ("`Fair market value of property' means the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm's length, bona fide sale.")....
Copy

Chatham Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Emmoth, 598 S.E.2d 495 (Ga. 2004).

Cited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 28, 2004 | 278 Ga. 144, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 2126

...whenever the owner allows the preliminary assessment under subsection (c) to lapse upon expiration of the two-year rehabilitation period. This argument has no merit, however, because in order to determine that value the Board need only look to OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(C), which defines "fair market value" of property classified as rehabilitated historic property under OCGA § 48-5-7.2, and OCGA § 48-5-7.2(g)(3), which sets forth the same test to be used when the county tax receiver or tax commissioner enters the basis or value of a parcel of rehabilitated historic property....
Copy

Columbus Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Yeoman, 293 Ga. 107 (Ga. 2013).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 3, 2013 | 744 S.E.2d 18, 2013 Fulton County D. Rep. 1685

NAHMIAS, Justice. The trial court in this case ruled that there is no conflict between the 2010 amendment to OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) (the “2010 Amendment”) and a 1981 local constitutional amendment (the “LCA”) providing for the assessment of homestead property in Muscogee County for school and consolidated city-county government taxing purposes....
...See generally Columbus-Muscogee County Consolidated Govt. v. CM Tax Equalization, Inc., 276 Ga. 332 (579 SE2d 200) (2003) (upholding this LCA against constitutional challenges). The LCA did not define “fair market value.” However, in 1981, the predecessor statute to OCGA § 48-5-2 (3) defined the term primarily as “the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm’s length, bona fide sale____” The 2010 Amendment added the following sentence to OCGA § 48-5-2 (3): Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, the transaction amount of the most recent arm’s length, bona fide sale in any year shall be the maximum allowable fair market value for the next taxable year. See Ga....
...But the LCA itself does not specify how the Board is to determine that value. The LCA does expressly provide, however, that its terms are “[s]ubject to the conditions and limitations specified by law,” and that law includes the state statute, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3), that directs how the fair market value of property in Georgia is to be determined. Thus, OCGA § 48-5-2 (3), as amended in 2010, does not prevent the Board from determining the fair market value of homestead property on January 1 of the applicable tax year; it provides the method for assessing that value as of that date. Indeed, the amended OCGA § 48-5-2 (3), with its focus on the actual market-determined value of property on the actual date the property was acquired, rather than its value as much as a year later, is entirely consistent with the LCA, which this Court has described as an “...
..., continuity and stability, . . . and the protection of reliance interests of existing homeowners.” Columbus-Muscogee County Consolidated Govt., 276 Ga. at 335. For these reasons, there is no conflict between the LCA and the 2010 Amendment to OCGA § 48-5-2 (3). The Board notes that under this “mechanical” (we prefer “straightforward”) application of the amended statute to assess the fair market value of newly purchased homestead property, assessments may be lower than the Board might...
Copy

Newton Timber Co., L.L.L.P. v. Monroe Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 295 Ga. 29 (Ga. 2014).

Cited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 10, 2014 | 755 S.E.2d 770, 2014 Fulton County D. Rep. 442

...assessments made by the Monroe County Board of Tax Assessors (“Board”) for their properties, totaling more than 100 separate tax appeals. See OCGA § 48-5- 299.1 In 2008 and 2009, they filed notices of appeal to the Monroe County 1 OCGA § 48-5-299 provides: (a) It shall be the duty of the county board of tax assessors to investigate diligently and to inquire into the property owned in the county for the purpose of ascertaining what real and personal proper...
...'s fair market value. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “fair market value” shall mean the fair market value of rehabilitated historic property pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (3) of Code Section 48-5-2. (c.1) Tangible real property which qualifies as landmark historic property pursuant to the provisions of Code Section 48-5-7.3 shall be assessed at 40 percent of its fair market value and shall be taxed on a...
...s fair market value. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “fair market value” shall mean the fair market value of landmark historic property pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) of Code Section 48-5-2. (c.2) Tangible real property which is devoted to bona fide conservation uses as defined in this chapter and which otherwise conforms to the conditions and limitations imposed in this chapter shall be as...
...40 percent of the property's fair market value. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “fair market value” shall mean the fair market value of brownfield property pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph (F) of paragraph (3) of Code Section 48-5-2. (d) The requirement contained in this Code section that all tax jurisdictions assess taxable tangible property at 40 percent of fair market value shall not apply to any tax jurisdiction whose ratio of assessed value to fair market value exceeded 40 percent for the tax year 1971....

Gateway Pines Hahira, Lp v. Lowndes Cnty. Bd. of Tax Assessors (Ga. 2025).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Aug 26, 2025 | 755 S.E.2d 770, 2014 Fulton County D. Rep. 442

...uture.” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs., r. 560-11-10-.09(4)(c). precedent established in Freedom Heights, LP v. Lowndes County Board of Tax Assessors, 369 Ga. App. 725 (2023), the Court of Appeals in this case concluded that our precedent regarding OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) (a statute that addresses how Section 42 tax credits may be considered under the income approach)3 compelled it to conclude that, “as [Section 42 tax credits] are currently structured, tax assessors may not use the incom...
...conclusion that is inconsistent with the plain language of the statute. We therefore overrule Freedom Heights, reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals in this case, and hold, consistent with our precedent and the plain language of OCGA § 48-5- 3 OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) provides that Section 42 tax credits “may be considered in determining the fair market value of [a Section 42 property]” under the income approach “provided that such income tax credits generate actual income to the re...
...for taxation at its fair market value.” OCGA § 48-5-6. And the Code defines “[f]air market value of property” as “the amount a knowledgeable buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would accept for the property at an arm’s length, bona fide sale.” OCGA § 48-5-2(3). Under OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B), tax assessors are required to consider several criteria in assessing the fair market value of real property....
...These criteria include, among other things, “[r]ent limitations, higher operating costs resulting from regulatory requirements imposed on the property, and any other restrictions imposed upon the property in connection with the property being eligible for [Section 42] income tax credits,” OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vi), 3 as well as “[a]ny other existing factors provided by law or by rule and regulation of the [revenue] commissioner deemed pertinent in arriving at fair market value,” OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(viii). Pursuant to the Public Revenue Code, the revenue commissioner has adopted a “procedural manual for use by county property appraisal staff in appraising tangible real and personal property for ad valorem tax purposes.” OCGA § 48-5-269.1(a)....
...cost, income and expense information to reliably quantify those factors. However, irrespective of the valuation approach used, the final results of any appraisal of real property by the appraisal staff shall in all instances comply with the definition of fair market value in Code section 48-5-2.”); Ga....
...560-11-10-.09(4)(c). In addition to Rule 560-11-10-.09’s guidelines, there are also statutory provisions that place limitations on how tax assessors may go about determining the fair market value of real property. See, e.g., OCGA § 48-5-2(3) (requiring tax assessors who are “determining the fair market value of income-producing property” to “consider[ ]” the “income approach, if data are available”)....
...ake II Apartments, LP v. Lowndes County Board of Tax Assessors, 306 Ga. 816 (2019) (“Heron Lake Two”), both of which concerned ad valorem taxation of Section 42 properties. In Heron Lake One, we addressed the constitutionality of OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B.1), which expressly prohibited tax assessors from considering Section 42 tax credits in determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties.4 See Heron Lake One, 299 Ga. at 598. We held that the statute violated Article VII, Section I, Paragraph III(a) of Georgia’s 1983 Constitution (“the taxation uniformity provision”) 5 because Section 42 tax credits “are part and 4 See OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B.1) (“The tax assessor shall not consider any income tax credits with respect to real property which are claimed and granted pursuant to either Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Chapter 7 of this title i...
...the statute created an unconstitutional subclass of tangible property subject to preferential treatment for ad valorem tax purposes. Id. at 609–10 (quotation marks omitted). 6 Following Heron Lake One, the General Assembly amended OCGA § 48-5-2 to include limitations on tax assessors’ use of certain methods for determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties....
...III(b)(1) (“Except as otherwise provided in this subparagraph (b), classes of subjects for taxation of property shall consist of tangible property and one or more classes of intangible personal property including money[.]”). 6 Although Heron Lake One declared “OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B.1) unconstitutional for violating the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision[,] ....
...to the property[.] In Heron Lake Two, we interpreted this provision and held that it does not violate the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision. See Heron Lake Two, 306 Ga. at 821–28. And as explained below, our interpretation of OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) in Heron Lake Two is the genesis of the dispute giving rise to this appeal. 2....
...approach to circumstances where a tax assessor could show that [Section 42 tax credits] generate actual income. And, as currently structured, [Section 42 tax credits] do not constitute actual income for the purposes of OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II)....
...See Freedom Heights, 369 Ga. App. at 730 (same). We granted certiorari to determine whether “tax assessors [are] permitted to use the income approach to determine the fair market value of a property with low-income housing tax credits,” in light of OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) and Heron Lake Two. 3. We answer the certiorari question in the affirmative: in accordance with OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) and Heron Lake Two, tax assessors may use the income approach to determine the fair market value of Section 42 properties, although OCGA § 48-5- 12 2(3)(B)(vii)(II) imposes a limitation on how tax assessors may do so. As explained below, contrary to the Court of Appeals’ opinion in this case and the precedent on which it relied, Heron Lake Two did not construe OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) as prohibiting tax assessors from using the income approach when determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties but instead as prohibiting tax assessors from treating Section 42 tax credits as income (unless they lead to actual income) when using the income approach to assess the fair market value of Section 42 properties. And the plain language of OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) permits use of the income approach even when Section 42 tax credits cannot be considered under that approach. In Heron Lake Two, the trial court concluded that OCGA § 48- 5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) would violate the Georgia...
...See Heron Lake Two, 306 Ga. at 819. And the trial court therefore applied the doctrine of constitutional avoidance to construe the 13 statute as permitting “[Section 42 tax credits to] be considered ‘actual income’ under OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II)’s income approach.” Id. On appeal, we reversed, concluding that the statute could not be so construed, and that the statute did not violate the taxation uniformity provision when properly construed. See id. at 816. As we explained, OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) “define[s] the contours” of “the income approach” by “tell[ing] tax assessors how they can use the . . . income approach[ ] in determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties.” Heron Lake Two, 306 Ga. at 821, 824 (emphasis added). Relying on the statute’s “plain text,” we explained that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) provides that, “when establishing the fair market value of Section 42 properties under the income approach, tax assessors may consider [Section 42 tax credits] attributable to those properties” only if “the [Section...
...reduce [the recipient’s] overall tax burden” by allowing the recipient to “pay less in taxes to the government.” Id. at 821–22, 827 (citations and emphasis omitted). Turning to the constitutional question, we concluded that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) does not “place[ ] [Section 42] properties in a distinct subclass of property for taxation purposes” and therefore does not violate the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision....
...This is so, we explained, “because [the statutory provision] does not altogether preclude tax assessors from considering [Section 42 tax credits] as part of the fair market value of Section 42 properties.” Id. at 825. Instead, we explained, OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) “simply limit[s] the applicability of the ....
...be accurately and fairly applied” to Section 42 tax credits “based on reliable data” in “situations” where “a tax assessor could show that [Section 42 tax credits in fact] ‘generate actual income.’” Id. And we noted that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II)’s prohibition on considering Section 42 tax credits, as currently structured, when applying the income approach did not prohibit tax assessors from considering Section 42 tax credits as contributing to the fair market value of Section 42 properties....
...any appraisal of real property . . . conform[s] to the definition of fair market value.” Id. (citations and punctuation omitted). As this description of Heron Lake Two shows, the Court of Appeals in Freedom Heights erred in concluding that we “construed” OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) “in favor of its constitutionality” to “limit[ ] the applicability of the income approach to circumstances where a tax assessor could show that [Section 42 tax credits] generate actual income.” Freedom Heights, 369 Ga....
...a construction that is constitutional, and another that would be unconstitutional, that meaning or construction will be applied which will sustain the act.” (quotation marks omitted)), we did not rely on that legal principle when construing OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II). Instead, we construed OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) according to its “plain text.” Heron Lake Two, 306 Ga. at 821–22. By its plain terms, OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) does not address the circumstances under which the income approach may be considered in determining the fair market value of Section 42 properties but instead the circumstances under which Section 42 “income tax credits ....
...at 827–28. And because OCGA § 48-5- 19 2(3)(B)(vii)(II) does not “completely exempt [Section 42 tax credits] from an assessor’s consideration,” like the statute at issue in Heron Lake One, we concluded that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) does not violate the Georgia Constitution’s taxation uniformity provision....
...42 properties, Freedom Heights placed undue emphasis on isolated statements from our opinion, which only appear ambiguous when divorced from the context in which they appear. Specifically, the Court of Appeals appears to have focused on our statements that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) “limit[s] the applicability of the . . . income approach[ ],” and that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II)’s “method has a narrow range of potential applications.” Heron Lake Two, 306 Ga....
...limitation on “how” tax assessors can use the income approach “when establishing the fair market value of Section 42 properties under the income approach.” Id. at 821 (emphasis added). As described above, we concluded that OCGA § 48-5-2(3)(B)(vii)(II) “limit[s] the applicability” of the income approach by providing that, “when establishing the fair market value of Section 42 properties under the income approach,” “[Section 42 tax credits] can[ ] be counted...