Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 74-2438 (2026)

Appeals to state board; notice and hearing; interest tolled, when; procedure; duties of county or district appraisers

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

74-2438. Appeals to state board; notice and hearing; interest tolled, when; procedure; duties of county or district appraisers. (a) An appeal may be taken to the state board of tax appeals from any finding, ruling, order, decision, final determination or other final action, including action relating to abatement or reduction of penalty and interest, on any case of the secretary of revenue or the secretary's designee by any person aggrieved thereby. Notice of such appeal shall be filed with the secretary of the board within 30 days after such finding, ruling, order, decision, final determination or other action on a case, and a copy served upon the secretary of revenue or the secretary's designee. An appeal may also be taken to the state board of tax appeals at any time when no final determination has been made by the secretary of revenue or the secretary's designee after 270 days has passed since the date of the request for informal conference pursuant to K.S.A. 79-3226, and amendments thereto, and no written agreement by the parties to further extend the time for making such final determination is in effect.

(b) Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the board shall conduct a hearing in accordance with the provisions of the Kansas administrative procedure act. The hearing before the board shall be a de novo hearing unless the parties agree to submit the case on the record made before the secretary of revenue or the secretary's designee.

(c) (1) With regard to any matter properly submitted to the board relating to the determination of valuation of residential property or real property used for commercial and industrial purposes for taxation purposes, it shall be the duty of the county or district appraiser to initiate the production of evidence to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, the validity and correctness of such determination, except that no such duty shall accrue with regard to leased commercial and industrial property unless the property owner has furnished to the county or district appraiser a complete income and expense statement for the property for the three years next preceding the year of appeal. Any appraisal made by the county or district appraiser must be released through the discovery process to the taxpayer, the taxpayer's attorney or the taxpayer's representative. No presumption shall exist in favor of the county or district appraiser with respect to the validity and correctness of such determination. If a taxpayer presents a single property appraisal with an effective date of January 1 of the year appealed which has been conducted by a certified general real property appraiser which determines the subject property's valuation to be less than that determined by a mass real estate appraisal conducted by the county or district appraiser, then the taxpayer's property-specific appraisal shall be accepted into evidence by the board. No interest shall accrue on the amount of the assessment of tax subject to any such appeal beyond 120 days after the date the matter was fully submitted, except that, if a final order is issued within such time period, interest shall continue to accrue until such time as the tax liability is fully satisfied, and if a final order is issued beyond such time period, interest shall recommence to accrue from the date of such order until such time as the tax liability is fully satisfied.

(2) With regard to any matter properly submitted to the board relating to the determination of valuation of real property, if the director of property valuation has developed and adopted methodologies to value such type of property, then it shall be the duty of the county or district appraiser to demonstrate compliance with such methodologies.

History: L. 1957, ch. 429, § 11; L. 1963, ch. 404, § 1; L. 1972, ch. 342, § 80; L. 1987, ch. 293, § 1; L. 1988, ch. 356, § 288; L. 1996, ch. 264, § 10; L. 1997, ch. 126, § 5; L. 1999, ch. 126, § 8; L. 2002, ch. 186, § 3; L. 2008, ch. 109, § 16; L. 2014, ch. 141, § 6; L. 2016, ch. 112, § 5; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 36 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1971–2024 · leading case: In Re the Appeal of Panhandle E. Pipe Line Co., 39 P.3d 21 (Kan. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re the Appeal of Panhandle E. Pipe Line Co., 39 P.3d 21 (Kan. 2002). · cites it 9× “Pursuant to K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 74-2438, Panhandle filed an appeal with BOTA on September 22, 1998.”

Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Dir. of Prop. Valuation, 861 P.2d 1348 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 12× “We find that neither BOTA nor this court has jurisdiction pursuant to K.S.A. 74-2438 to hear an appeal by the Counties from the decision of the Director because the Counties do not have standing to invoke the jurisdiction of BOTA or this court.”

In Re the Equalization Proceeding of the Amoco Prod. Co., 102 P.3d 1176 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “Amoco argues that Grant County is required by K.S.A. 74-2438 to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence the validity and correctness of its valuation of Amoco’s industrial property to BOTA.”

In Re Tax Appeal of Trickett, 8 P.3d 18 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 5× “As such, the issue becomes, does a statute allow BOTA to raise a statute of limitations defense? Under K.S.A. 1999 Supp. 74-2438, BOTA must conduct a hearing according to the Kansas Administrative Procedure Act, K.”

Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. Beshears, 860 P.2d 56 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 5× “79-5a05 provides in pertinent part: “Before the assessed valuation of public utility property is finally determined, the director of property valuation shall cause to be sent to each public utility a statement of the appraised valuation of the utility’s property.”

In Re Application of Kinnet, 984 P.2d 725 (Kan. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 11× “Using the same analysis as BOTA, the district court found the Taxpayers failed to pursue their remedies under K.S.A. 74-2438 even though they were aware of the pending appeal in Topeka SMSA and the body of case law setting out the exclusive remedy for relief from valuation as a…”

Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. Beshears, 24 P.3d 113 (Kan. 2001). · cites it 2× “The district court found that these issues were also not a part of this case as they were barred by the failure to follow administrative procedures contained in K.S.A. 74-2438 and K.S.A. 79-5a05. This holding is also correct, and the Pipelines do not specifically dispute it.”

In Re the Appeals of Colorado Interstate Gas Co., 903 P.2d 154 (Kan. 1995). · cites it 6× ““WHEREFORE, Taxpayer requests the Board to conduct a hearing pursuant to K.S.A. § 74-2438, to find that Taxpayer is entitled to be assessed uniformly and equally; to adjust its Kansas assessed value to reflect fair, uniform, and equal treatment; to adjust its Kansas assessed…”

In Re Lakeview Gardens, Inc., 605 P.2d 576 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 2× “Section 11 of chapter 429, now codified as K.S.A. 74-2438, authorizes appeals from the director of revenue and the director of property valuation to the Board of Tax Appeals.”

ETC Mktg., Ltd. v. Harris Cnty. Appraisal Dist., 528 S.W.3d 70 (Tex. 2017). “Gas Energy, a Div. of S. Union Co. for Tax Years 1998, 1999, and 2000, 234 P.”

Friends of Bethany Place, Inc. v. City of Topeka, 307 P.3d 1255 (Kan. 2013). “65-4211; K.S.A. 74-2438; K.S.A. 74-7028; K.S.A. 77-631(a); K.”

ETC Mktg., Ltd. v. Harris Cnty. Appraisal Dist., 476 S.W.3d 501 (Tex. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “Valuation of State for Tax Year 2009 Pursuant to K.S.A. 74-2438, 313 P.3d 789, 799 (Kan. 2013) (also declining to follow Peoples Gas: “There is axiomatically a substantial nexus between Kansas and the gas stored in this state.”

Show all 36 citing cases →

— K.S.A. § 74-2438(a) — 4 cases

Baker v. Kansas Sec'y of State (D. Kan. 2024).

FreeState Elec. Coop., Inc. v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue (Kan. 2024).

Kansas Dept. of Revenue v. Sciolaro (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).

In re Tax Appeal of Greene (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).

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.