(1) When the appropriate state government agency determines that a taxpayer
has paid ad valorem taxes into the state treasury when no taxes were due or
has paid under a statute held unconstitutional, the state government agency
which administers the tax shall refund the money, or cause it to be refunded, to
the person who paid the tax. The state government agency shall not authorize
a refund to a person who has paid the tax due on any tract of land unless the
taxpayer has paid the entire tax due the state on the land.
(2) No state government agency shall authorize a refund unless each taxpayer
individually applies for a refund within two (2) years from the date the taxpayer
paid the tax. Each claim or application for a refund shall be in writing and state
the specific grounds upon which it is based. Denials of refund claims or
applications may be protested and appealed in accordance with KRS 49.220
and 131.110. No state government agency shall refund ad valorem taxes,
except those held unconstitutional, unless the taxpayer has properly followed
the administrative remedy procedures established through the protest
provisions of KRS 131.110, the appeal provisions of KRS 133.120, the
correction provisions of KRS 133.110 and 133.130, or other administrative
remedy procedures.
(3) If a taxpayer pays city, urban-county, county, school district, consolidated local
government, or special district ad valorem taxes to a city, urban-county, county,
school district, consolidated local government, or special district when no taxes
were due or the amount paid exceeded the amount finally determined to be
due, the taxes shall be refunded to the person who paid the tax.
(4) Refunds of ad valorem taxes shall be authorized by the mayor or chief finance
officer of any city, consolidated local government, or urban-county government
for the city, consolidated local government, or urban-county government or for
any special district for which the city, consolidated local government, or
urban-county government is the levying authority, by the county
judge/executive of any county for the county or special district for which the
fiscal court is the levying authority, or by the chairman or finance officer of any
district board of education.
(5) Upon proper authorization, the sheriff or collector shall refund the taxes from
current tax collections he or she holds. If there are no such funds, the district's
finance officer shall make the refunds. The sheriff or collector shall receive
credit on the next collection report to the district for any refunds the sheriff or
collector makes.
(6) No refund shall be made unless each taxpayer individually applies within two
(2) years from the date payment was made. If the amount of taxes due is in
litigation, the taxpayer shall individually apply for refund within two (2) years
from the date the amount due is finally determined. Each claim or application
for a refund shall be in writing and state the specific grounds upon which it is
based. No refund for ad valorem taxes, except those held unconstitutional,
shall be made unless the taxpayer has properly followed the administrative
remedy procedures established through the protest provisions of KRS 131.110,
the appeal provisions of KRS 133.120, the correction provisions of KRS
133.110 and 133.130, or other administrative remedy procedures.
(7) Notwithstanding other statutory provisions, for property subject to a tax rate
that is set each year based on the certified assessment, a taxing district may
recover any loss of ad valorem tax revenue it suffers due to the issuance of
refunds by adjusting the following tax year's tax rate.
Effective:June 29, 2017
History: Amended 2017 Ky. Acts ch. 74, sec. 77, effective June 29, 2017. --
Amended 2005 Ky. Acts ch. 112, sec. 2, effective June 20, 2005. -- Amended
2002 Ky. Acts ch. 346, sec. 172, effective July 15, 2002. -- Amended 1996 Ky.
Acts ch. 344, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1996. -- Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 391,
sec. 5, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended 1990 Ky. Acts ch. 177, sec. 2,
effective July 13, 1990. -- Amended 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 270, sec. 1, effective July
15, 1980. -- Amended 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 187, Part I, sec. 2. -- Amended 1954
Ky. Acts ch. 5, sec. 1. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective
October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. secs. 162, 163, 4114h-7.
Notes of Decisions
City of Somerset v. Bell, 156 S.W.3d 321 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 46× “But the court concluded that the relief requested by the taxpayers under KRS 134.590 could not be granted because the taxpayers had failed to exhaust certain administrative remedies.”
St. Ledger v. Commonwealth, Revenue Cabinet, 942 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1997).
· cites it 54× “KRS 134.590 also requires some type of refund under these circumstances as a matter of state law, independent of due process requirements.”
Commonwealth, Revenue Cabinet v. Gossum, 887 S.W.2d 329 (Ky. 1994).
· cites it 28× “The circuit court reasoned that inasmuch as the Commonwealth has consented by statute to refund taxes paid under an unconstitutional provision (KRS 134.590), the retroactivity of Davis is essentially a moot question; refunds being in order as a matter of state law.”
Cromwell Louisville Assocs., Ltd. P'ship v. Commonwealth, 323 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2010).
· cites it 15× “Consequently, the court found that Appellant failed to comply with the mandatory administrative appeals procedures, preventing it from seeking a refund under KRS 134.590 for overpayment of taxes. We also hold Appellant did not comply with the statutory requirements contained in…”
Bd. of Educ. v. Taulbee, 706 S.W.2d 827 (Ky. 1986).
· cites it 13× “590(3) provides that a local taxing district may make refunds where the amount of tax paid was in excess of the amount finally determined to be due.”
St. Ledger v. Commonwealth, 912 S.W.2d 34 (Ky. 1995).
· cites it 4× “Further, the Circuit Court held that appellants were entitled to apply for refunds of taxes paid for the preceding two year period pursuant to KRS 134.590. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the exemption statute enforceable and valid.”
Revenue Cabinet v. CSC Oil Co., 851 S.W.2d 497 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 7× “KRS 134.590 provides in pertinent part as follows: (1) When it appears to the appropriate agency of state government that money has been paid into the State Treasury .”
Bischoff v. City of Newport, 733 S.W.2d 762 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 4× “The appellant argues that the circuit court erred in determining (1) that the action could not be prosecuted as a class action, and (2) that compliance with KRS 134.590 was mandatory in order to bring an action for recovery of ad valorem taxes paid.”
City of Bromley v. Smith, 149 S.W.3d 403 (Ky. 2004).
· cites it 4× “Thus, it was error for the Court of Appeals to apply KRS 134.590. It was also incorrect in determining that a request for class certification for refund purposes could not be established.”
Light v. City of Louisville, 93 S.W.3d 696 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 5× “590(1) and (2) address the refund of taxes paid to state agencies, while subsections (3) through (6) address the refund of “city, urban-county, county, school district, or special district ad valo-rem taxes.”
Coleman v. Campbell Cnty. Library Bd. of Trs., 901 F. Supp. 2d 925 (E.D. Ky. 2012).
· cites it 4× “Specifically, Defendants sought dismissal because Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies prior to filing their lawsuits as mandated by KRS 134.590: No refund for ad valorem taxes, except those held unconstitutional, shall be made unless the taxpayer has…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 134.590(1) — 9 cases
Bd. of Educ. v. Taulbee, 706 S.W.2d 827 (Ky. 1986).
“590(3) provides that a local taxing district may make refunds where the amount of tax paid was in excess of the amount finally determined to be due.”
Commonwealth, Revenue Cabinet v. Gossum, 887 S.W.2d 329 (Ky. 1994).
“The circuit court reasoned that inasmuch as the Commonwealth has consented by statute to refund taxes paid under an unconstitutional provision (KRS 134.590), the retroactivity of Davis is essentially a moot question; refunds being in order as a matter of state law.”
Revenue Cabinet v. CSC Oil Co., 851 S.W.2d 497 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).
“KRS 134.590 provides in pertinent part as follows: (1) When it appears to the appropriate agency of state government that money has been paid into the State Treasury .”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 134.590(2) — 6 cases
Cromwell Louisville Assocs., Ltd. P'ship v. Commonwealth, 323 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2010).
“Consequently, the court found that Appellant failed to comply with the mandatory administrative appeals procedures, preventing it from seeking a refund under KRS 134.590 for overpayment of taxes. We also hold Appellant did not comply with the statutory requirements contained in…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 134.590(3) — 3 cases
City of Bromley v. Smith, 149 S.W.3d 403 (Ky. 2004).
“Thus, it was error for the Court of Appeals to apply KRS 134.590. It was also incorrect in determining that a request for class certification for refund purposes could not be established.”
Bd. of Educ. v. Taulbee, 706 S.W.2d 827 (Ky. 1986).
“590(3) provides that a local taxing district may make refunds where the amount of tax paid was in excess of the amount finally determined to be due.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 134.590(6) — 9 cases
City of Somerset v. Bell, 156 S.W.3d 321 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
“But the court concluded that the relief requested by the taxpayers under KRS 134.590 could not be granted because the taxpayers had failed to exhaust certain administrative remedies.”
Commonwealth, Revenue Cabinet v. Gossum, 887 S.W.2d 329 (Ky. 1994).
“The circuit court reasoned that inasmuch as the Commonwealth has consented by statute to refund taxes paid under an unconstitutional provision (KRS 134.590), the retroactivity of Davis is essentially a moot question; refunds being in order as a matter of state law.”
Bd. of Educ. v. Taulbee, 706 S.W.2d 827 (Ky. 1986).
“590(3) provides that a local taxing district may make refunds where the amount of tax paid was in excess of the amount finally determined to be due.”
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.