Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737

Determination of property's taxable value; equalization; burden of proof; joinder of claims; motion fee; interest; motion to amend petition to add subsequent years; notice of hearing; appeal without prior protest.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TAX TRIBUNAL ACT


Act 186 of 1973


205.737 Determination of property's taxable value; equalization; burden of proof; joinder of claims; motion fee; interest; motion to amend petition to add subsequent years; notice of hearing; appeal without prior protest.

Sec. 37.

    (1) The tribunal shall determine a property's taxable value pursuant to section 27a of the general property tax act, 1893 PA 206, MCL 211.27a.

    (2) The tribunal shall determine a property's state equalized valuation by multiplying its finding of true cash value by a percentage equal to the ratio of the average level of assessment in relation to true cash values in the assessment district, and equalizing that product by application of the equalization factor that is uniformly applicable in the assessment district for the year in question. The property's state equalized valuation shall not exceed 50% of the true cash value of the property on the assessment date.

    (3) The petitioner has the burden of proof in establishing the true cash value of the property. The assessing agency has the burden of proof in establishing the ratio of the average level of assessments in relation to true cash values in the assessment district and the equalization factor that was uniformly applied in the assessment district for the year in question.

    (4) If the taxpayer paid additional taxes as a result of the unlawful assessments on the same property after filing the petition, or if in subsequent years an unlawful assessment is made against the same property, the taxpayer, not later than the filing deadline prescribed in section 35 for a proceeding before the tribunal that is commenced before January 1, 2007 or section 35a for a proceeding before the tribunal that is commenced after December 31, 2006, except as otherwise provided in subsections (5) and (7), may amend the petition to join all of the claims for a determination of the property's taxable value, state equalized valuation, or exempt status and for a refund of payments based on the unlawful assessments. The motion to amend the petition to add a subsequent year shall be accompanied by a motion fee equal to 50% of the filing fee to file a petition to commence an appeal for that property in that year. A sum determined by the tribunal to have been unlawfully paid or underpaid shall bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and the judgment shall bear interest to date of its payment. However, a sum determined by the tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 days after the tribunal's decision. Interest required by this subsection shall accrue for periods before April 1, 1982 at a rate of 6% per year, shall accrue for periods after March 31, 1982 but before April 1, 1985 at a rate of 12% per year, and shall accrue for periods after March 31, 1985 but before April 1, 1994 at a rate of 9% per year. After March 31, 1994 but before January 1, 1996, interest shall accrue at an interest rate set monthly at a per annum rate based on the auction rate of the 91-day discount treasury bill rate for the first Monday in each month, plus 1%. After December 31, 1995 but before July 1, 2012, interest shall accrue at an interest rate set each year based on the average auction rate of 91-day discount treasury bills in the immediately preceding state fiscal year as certified by the department of treasury, plus 1%. The department of treasury shall certify the interest rate within 60 days after the end of the immediately preceding fiscal year. After June 30, 2012, interest shall accrue at 1 percentage point above the adjusted prime rate. As used in this section, "adjusted prime rate" means the average predominant prime rate quoted by not fewer than 3 commercial banks to large businesses, as determined by the department of treasury. The adjusted prime rate is to be based on the average prime rate charged by not fewer than 3 commercial banks during the 6-month period ending on March 31 and the 6-month period ending on September 30. One percentage point shall be added to the adjusted prime rate and the resulting sum shall be divided by 12 to establish the current monthly interest rate. The resulting current monthly interest rate based on the 6-month period ending March 31 becomes effective on the following July 1, and the resulting current monthly interest rate based on the 6-month period ending September 30 becomes effective on January 1 of the following year. The tribunal shall order the refund of all or part of a property tax administration fee paid in connection with taxes that the tribunal determines were unlawfully paid.

    (5) A motion to amend a petition to add subsequent years is not necessary in the following circumstances:

    (a) If the tribunal has jurisdiction over a petition alleging that the property is exempt from taxation, the appeal for each subsequent year for which an assessment has been established shall be added automatically to the petition. However, upon leave of the tribunal, the petitioner or respondent may request that any subsequent year be excluded from appeal at the time of the hearing on the petition.

    (b) If the residential property and small claims division of the tribunal has jurisdiction over a petition, the appeal for each subsequent year for which an assessment has been established shall be added automatically to the petition. The residential property and small claims division shall automatically add to an appeal of a final determination of a claim for exemption of a principal residence or of qualified agricultural property each subsequent year in which a claim for exemption of that principal residence or that qualified agricultural property is denied. However, upon leave of the tribunal, the petitioner or respondent may request that any subsequent year be excluded from appeal at the time of the hearing on the petition.

    (6) The notice of the hearing on a petition shall include a statement advising the petitioner of the right to amend his or her petition to include or exclude subsequent years as provided by subsections (4) and (5).

    (7) If the final equalization multiplier for the tax year is greater than the tentative multiplier used in preparing the assessment notice and as a result of action of the state board of equalization or county board of commissioners a taxpayer's assessment as equalized is in excess of 50% of true cash value, that person may appeal directly to the tax tribunal without a prior protest before the local board of review. The appeal shall be filed under this subsection on or before the third Monday in August and shall be heard in the same manner as other appeals of the tribunal. An appeal pursuant to this subsection shall not result in an equalized value less than the assessed value multiplied by the tentative equalization multiplier used in preparing the assessment notice.

History: 1973, Act 186, Eff. July 1, 1974 ;-- Am. 1976, Act 365, Imd. Eff. Dec. 23, 1976 ;-- Am. 1982, Act 57, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1982 ;-- Am. 1983, Act 163, Imd. Eff. July 24, 1983 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 63, Imd. Eff. June 19, 1985 ;-- Am. 1987, Act 23, Imd. Eff. Apr. 24, 1987 ;-- Am. 1992, Act 172, Imd. Eff. July 21, 1992 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 21, Imd. Eff. Apr. 14, 1993 ;-- Am. 1994, Act 254, Imd. Eff. July 5, 1994 ;-- Am. 1995, Act 232, Imd. Eff. Dec. 19, 1995 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 505, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1997 ;-- Am. 2003, Act 131, Eff. Jan. 1, 2004 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 174, Imd. Eff. May 30, 2006 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 220, Imd. Eff. June 28, 2012

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 85 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1977–2025 · leading case: Great Lakes Div. v. City of Ecorse
Great Lakes Div. v. City of Ecorse (1998) michctapp · cites it 5× “, supra at 354-355, 483 N.W.2d 416 . Provisions in the Tax Tribunal Act concerning the burden of proof and the de novo nature of the Tax Tribunal proceedings, M.”
Great Lakes Division of National Steel Corp. v. City of Ecorse (1998) michctapp · cites it 5× “Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp, supra at 354-355. Provisions in the Tax Tribunal Act concerning the burden of proof and the de novo nature of the Tax Tribunal proceedings, MCL 205.”
Wikman v. City of Novi (1982) mich · cites it 4× “This provision, by its terms as amended by 1976 PA 365 , would not apply to a special assessment.”
CAF Investment Co. v. Saginaw Township (1981) mich · cites it 2× “Interest on any refund shall be calculated as prescribed by MCL 205.737(4); MSA 7.650(37)(4). *466 No costs, a public question being involved.”
Northwood Apartments v. City of Royal Oak (1980) michctapp · cites it 3× “The assessment may be altered by application of county and state equalization processes.”
Michigan Properties, LLC v. Meridian Township (2012) mich “] Additionally, MCL 205.737(1) provides that “[t]he tribunal shall determine a property’s taxable value pursuant to [MCL 211.”
Menard, Inc v. City of Escanaba (2016) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3). The burden of proof encompasses two concepts: “(1) the burden of persuasion, which does not shift during the course of the hearing; and (2) the burden of going forward with the evidence, which may shift to the opposing party.”
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. City of Warren (1992) michctapp · cites it 2× “MCL 205.737(3); MSA 7.650(37X3). The market approach is the only valuation method that directly reflects the balance of supply and demand for property in marketplace trading.”
Pinelake Housing Cooperative v. City of Ann Arbor (1987) michctapp · cites it 4× “Consolidated Aluminum Corp v Richmond Twp, 88 Mich App 229, 232-233 ; 276 NW2d 566 (1979); MCL 205.737(1); MSA 7.650(37)(1). The tribunal may not simply accept a respondent's assessment, but must make its own findings of fact and arrive at a legally supportable conclusion of…”
Forest Hills Cooperative v. City of Ann Arbor (2014) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3); Pontiac Country Club, 299 Mich App at 435 .”
Kinder Morgan Michigan, LLC v. City of Jackson (2008) michctapp “See MCL 205.737(5)(a) (stating that “ [i]f the tribunal has jurisdiction over a petition alleging that the *163 property is exempt from taxation, the appeal for each subsequent year for which an assessment has been established shall be added automatically to the petition”).”
President Inn Properties, LLC v. City of Grand Rapids (2011) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3); Great Lakes Div of Nat’l Steel Corp v Ecorse, 227 Mich App 379, 389 ; 576 NW2d 667 (1998).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737(1) — 15 cases
Wikman v. City of Novi (1982) mich “This provision, by its terms as amended by 1976 PA 365 , would not apply to a special assessment.”
Michigan Properties, LLC v. Meridian Township (2012) mich “] Additionally, MCL 205.737(1) provides that “[t]he tribunal shall determine a property’s taxable value pursuant to [MCL 211.”
Pinelake Housing Cooperative v. City of Ann Arbor (1987) michctapp “Consolidated Aluminum Corp v Richmond Twp, 88 Mich App 229, 232-233 ; 276 NW2d 566 (1979); MCL 205.737(1); MSA 7.650(37)(1). The tribunal may not simply accept a respondent's assessment, but must make its own findings of fact and arrive at a legally supportable conclusion of…”
Great Lakes Div. v. City of Ecorse (1998) michctapp “, supra at 354-355, 483 N.W.2d 416 . Provisions in the Tax Tribunal Act concerning the burden of proof and the de novo nature of the Tax Tribunal proceedings, M.”
Great Lakes Division of National Steel Corp. v. City of Ecorse (1998) michctapp “Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp, supra at 354-355. Provisions in the Tax Tribunal Act concerning the burden of proof and the de novo nature of the Tax Tribunal proceedings, MCL 205.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737(2) — 8 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737(3) — 51 cases
Menard, Inc v. City of Escanaba (2016) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3). The burden of proof encompasses two concepts: “(1) the burden of persuasion, which does not shift during the course of the hearing; and (2) the burden of going forward with the evidence, which may shift to the opposing party.”
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. City of Warren (1992) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3); MSA 7.650(37X3). The market approach is the only valuation method that directly reflects the balance of supply and demand for property in marketplace trading.”
Forest Hills Cooperative v. City of Ann Arbor (2014) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3); Pontiac Country Club, 299 Mich App at 435 .”
President Inn Properties, LLC v. City of Grand Rapids (2011) michctapp “MCL 205.737(3); Great Lakes Div of Nat’l Steel Corp v Ecorse, 227 Mich App 379, 389 ; 576 NW2d 667 (1998).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737(4) — 14 cases
CAF Investment Co. v. Saginaw Township (1981) mich “Interest on any refund shall be calculated as prescribed by MCL 205.737(4); MSA 7.650(37)(4). *466 No costs, a public question being involved.”
Northwood Apartments v. City of Royal Oak (1980) michctapp “The assessment may be altered by application of county and state equalization processes.”
Kistner v. Milliken (1977) mied
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737(5)(a) — 2 cases
Kinder Morgan Michigan, LLC v. City of Jackson (2008) michctapp “See MCL 205.737(5)(a) (stating that “ [i]f the tribunal has jurisdiction over a petition alleging that the *163 property is exempt from taxation, the appeal for each subsequent year for which an assessment has been established shall be added automatically to the petition”).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.737(5)(b) — 4 cases
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.