Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 36-2-9-20 (2026)

County auditor maintenance of electronic data file on tax duplicate information; form of file; data transmission

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     Sec. 20. The county auditor shall:

(1) maintain an electronic data file of the information contained on the tax duplicate for all:

(A) parcels; and

(B) personal property returns;

for each township in the county as of each assessment date;

(2) maintain the electronic data file in a form that formats the information in the file with the standard data, field, and record coding required and approved by:

(A) the legislative services agency; and

(B) the department of local government finance;

(3) transmit the data in the file with respect to the assessment date of each year before March 16 of the next year to the department of local government finance in a manner that meets the data export and transmission requirements in a standard format, as prescribed by the office of technology established by IC 4-13.1-2-1 and approved by the legislative services agency; and

(4) resubmit the data in the form and manner required under this subsection, upon request of the legislative services agency or the department of local government finance, if data previously submitted under this subsection does not comply with the requirements of this subsection, as determined by the legislative services agency or the department of local government finance.

An electronic data file maintained for a particular assessment date may not be overwritten with data for a subsequent assessment date until a copy of an electronic data file that preserves the data for the particular assessment date is archived in the manner prescribed by the office of technology established by IC 4-13.1-2-1 and approved by the legislative services agency.

As added by P.L.178-2002, SEC.115. Amended by P.L.245-2003, SEC.34; P.L.28-2004, SEC.179; P.L.177-2005, SEC.46; P.L.137-2012, SEC.117; P.L.159-2020, SEC.78.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2011–2011 · leading case: Clinton Cnty. Ex Rel. Bd. of Commissioners v. Clements, 945 N.E.2d 721 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
Clinton Cnty. Ex Rel. Bd. of Commissioners v. Clements, 945 N.E.2d 721 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 36-2-9-20. 2 . The County’s complaint included claims against Clements for negligence, actual fraud, intentional interference with contractual relations, and civil action by a crime victim claim.”
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.