Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 15. TAXATION · CHAPTER 2. MONTANA TAX APPEAL BOARD · Part 3. Appeal Procedure
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301 (2026)

Appeal Of County Tax Appeal Board Decisions -- Rulemaking

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 15
  3. CHAPTER 2
  4. Part 3
  5. 15-2-301 Appeal of county tax appeal board decisions -- rulemaking

TITLE 15. TAXATION

CHAPTER 2. MONTANA TAX APPEAL BOARD

Part 3. Appeal Procedure

Appeal Of County Tax Appeal Board Decisions -- Rulemaking

15-2-301. Appeal of county tax appeal board decisions -- rulemaking. (1) (a) The county tax appeal board shall mail a copy of its decision to the taxpayer and to the property assessment division of the department of revenue.

(b) If the appearance provisions of 15-15-103 have been complied with, a person or the department on behalf of the state or any municipal corporation aggrieved by the action of the county tax appeal board may appeal to the Montana tax appeal board by filing with the Montana board a notice of appeal within the later of:

(i) 45 calendar days after the date of the county board hearing; or

(ii) 30 calendar days after the date the county board mails its decision.

(c) The notice of appeal must specify the action complained of and the reasons assigned for the complaint.

(d) Notice of acceptance of an appeal must be given to the county board by the Montana board.

(e) The Montana board shall set the appeal for hearing either in its office in the capital or at the county seat as the Montana board considers advisable to facilitate the performance of its duties or to accommodate parties in interest.

(f) The Montana board shall give to the appellant and to the respondent at least 15 calendar days' notice of the time and place of the hearing.

(2) (a) At the time of giving notice of acceptance of an appeal, the Montana board may require the county board to certify to it the minutes of the proceedings resulting in the action and all testimony taken in connection with its proceedings.

(b) The Montana board may, in its discretion, determine the appeal on the record if all parties receive a copy of the transcript and are permitted to submit additional sworn statements, or the Montana board may hear further testimony.

(c) For industrial property that is assessed annually by the department, the Montana board's review must be de novo and conducted in accordance with the contested case provisions of the Montana Administrative Procedure Act.

(d) For the purpose of expediting its work, the Montana board may refer any appeal to one of its members or to a designated hearings officer. The board member or hearings officer may exercise all the powers of the Montana board in conducting a hearing and shall, as soon as possible after the hearing, report the proceedings, together with a transcript or a tape recording of the hearing, to the Montana board. The Montana board shall determine the appeal on the record.

(3) (a) Except as provided in subsection (3)(b), the Montana tax appeal board shall consider an independent appraisal provided by the taxpayer if the appraisal meets standards set by the Montana board of real estate appraisers and the appraisal was conducted within 6 months of the valuation date. If the Montana board does not use the appraisal provided by the taxpayer in conducting the appeal, the Montana board shall provide to the taxpayer the reason for not using the appraisal.

(b) If the appeal is an appeal of the valuation of residential property, the Montana board shall consider an independent appraisal provided by the taxpayer if the appraisal meets standards set by the Montana board of real estate appraisers and uses values obtained within the timeframe provided for in subsection (3)(a). The appraisal that is provided by the taxpayer is presumed to establish assessed value in the Montana board proceeding unless the department provides sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness, including another independent appraisal or other compelling valuation evidence. The Montana board shall address the taxpayer's independent appraisal and the department's valuation evidence in the decision.

(4) In every hearing at a county seat throughout the state, the Montana board or the member or hearings officer designated to conduct a hearing may employ a competent person to electronically record the testimony received. The cost of electronically recording testimony may be paid out of the general appropriation for the board.

(5) Except as provided in subsection (2)(c) regarding industrial property, in connection with any appeal under this section, the Montana board is not bound by common law and statutory rules of evidence or rules of discovery and may affirm, reverse, or modify any decision. To the extent that this section is in conflict with the Montana Administrative Procedure Act, this section supersedes that act. The Montana board may not amend or repeal any administrative rule of the department. The Montana board shall give an administrative rule full effect unless the Montana board finds a rule arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise unlawful.

(6) The decision of the Montana board is final and binding on all interested parties and not subject to a rehearing unless reversed or modified by judicial review. Proceedings for judicial review of a decision of the Montana board under this section are subject to the provisions of 15-2-303 and the Montana Administrative Procedure Act to the extent that it does not conflict with 15-2-303.

(7) Sections 15-6-134 and 15-7-111 may not be construed to prevent the department from implementing an order to change the valuation of property.

(8) If the appeal involves class four residential property, a person satisfying the requirements in subsection (1)(b) may make an election to have the Montana board consider the appeal on an informal basis. If an informal review is elected, the decision of the Montana board is final and binding on all parties, including the department, and is not subject to reconsideration or an appeal to district court by the taxpayer or the department. The Montana board shall adopt rules outlining informal review procedures pursuant to this subsection (8).

History: En. Sec. 9, Ch. 3, L. 1923; re-en. Sec. 2122.9, R.C.M. 1935; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 33, L. 1939; amd. Sec. 54, Ch. 405, L. 1973; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 38, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 277, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 155, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 249, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 84-709; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 611, L. 1979; amd. Secs. 1, 2, Ch. 471, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 247, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 594, L. 1993; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 15, Sp. L. November 1993; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 134, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 81, Ch. 584, L. 1999; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 26, L. 2015; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 361, L. 2015; amd. Sec. 18, Ch. 142, L. 2021; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 148, L. 2021; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 691, L. 2023; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 206, L. 2025; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 385, L. 2025.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Dep't of Revenue v. State Tax Appeal Bd., 613 P.2d 691 (Mont. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dep't of Revenue v. State Tax Appeal Bd., 613 P.2d 691 (Mont. 1980). · cites it 9× “After hearing, the county tax appeal board denied relief and appeal was taken to the State Tax Appeal Board (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) under section 15-2-301, MCA. The Board overruled the county appeal board and ordered the Department to reduce all of the contested…”
Dep't of Revenue v. Countryside Vill., 667 P.2d 936 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 16× “When an appeal is taken under Section 15-2-301, MCA, STAB may only affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the County Tax Appeal Board.”
Ostergren v. Dep't of Revenue, 2004 MT 30 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 3× “Section 15-2-301, MCA. While BFI’s 1997 and 1999 appeals to CTAB both generally state that the appraised values were in excess of the market value and the appraisal method was incorrect, it never specifically challenged the 1996 VBR.”
Roosevelt v. Montana Dep't of Revenue, 1999 MT 30 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 4× “Article VIII, Section 7, of the Montana Constitution has not been violated because the Legislature has provided for tax appeal procedures at the local government level through §§ 15-15-101 to -106, MCA, and to the STAB through § 15-2-301, MCA. ¶ 14 3. Neither Roosevelt's right…”
Lipetzky v. Dep't of Revenue (In Re Lipetzky), 64 B.R. 431 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1986). · cites it 3× “In accordance with Montana law, the Debtors, as taxpayers, appealed each assessment, after pursuing its remedy to the County Tax Appeal Board (Section 15-15-102 MCA), to the Montana State Tax Appeals Board as provided by Section 15-2-301, MCA. On February 7, 1986, the State Tax…”
Butte Country Club v. Dep't of Revenue, 608 P.2d 111 (Mont. 1980). · cites it 3× “Following a hearing before, and decision of the Local Board, section 15-15-104, MCA, provides for an appeal to the State Tax Appeal Board (STAB) in accordance with the provisions of section 15-2-301, MCA, which in relevant part provides that: “Any person or the department of…”
Montana Dep't of Revenue v. Barron, 799 P.2d 533 (Mont. 1990). · cites it 2× “As to the administrative rules, § 15-2-301(4), MCA, provides that “the state tax appeal board must give an administrative rule full effect unless the board finds any such rule arbitrary, capricious or otherwise unlawful.”
Devoe v. Mt Dep't of Revenue, 866 P.2d 228 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 2× “On July 1, 1986, DeVoe timely appealed the County Board’s decision to the STAB pursuant to § 15-2-301, MCA. Among other things, he contended on appeal that the County Board had not addressed the issue that he raised, which was whether the DOR’s increase in the appraised value of…”
Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v. State, 2011 MT 141 (Mont. 2011). · cites it 15× “¶27 In comparison, § 15-2-301, MCA, provides for STAB’s review of appeals from the County Tax Appeal Boards (CTAB).”
DeVoe v. Dep't of Revenue, 866 P.2d 228 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 2× “On July 1, 1986, DeVoe timely appealed the County Board's decision to the STAB pursuant to § 15-2-301, MCA. Among other things, he contended on appeal that the County Board had not addressed the issue that he raised, which was whether the DOR's increase in the appraised value of…”
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). · cites it 63× “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Dep't of Rev. Of State of Mont. v. Paxson, 666 P.2d 768 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 4× “The taxpayer then appealed this order to the District Court, the scope of review being limited by the Montana Administrative Procedures Act (sections 15-2-301 through 15-2-304, MCA).”
Show all 19 citing cases →
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(1): 1 case
Hi-Line Radio Fellowship v. Dep't of Revenue, 737 P.2d 886 (Mont. 1987).
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(1)(e): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(2): 2 cases
Dep't of Rev. Of State of Mont. v. Paxson, 666 P.2d 768 (Mont. 1983). “The taxpayer then appealed this order to the District Court, the scope of review being limited by the Montana Administrative Procedures Act (sections 15-2-301 through 15-2-304, MCA).”
Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v. State, 2011 MT 141 (Mont. 2011). “¶27 In comparison, § 15-2-301, MCA, provides for STAB’s review of appeals from the County Tax Appeal Boards (CTAB).”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(2)(a): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(2)(b): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(2)(d): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(3)(a): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(4): 4 cases
Dep't of Revenue v. State Tax Appeal Bd., 613 P.2d 691 (Mont. 1980). “After hearing, the county tax appeal board denied relief and appeal was taken to the State Tax Appeal Board (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) under section 15-2-301, MCA. The Board overruled the county appeal board and ordered the Department to reduce all of the contested…”
Dep't of Revenue v. Countryside Vill., 667 P.2d 936 (Mont. 1983). “When an appeal is taken under Section 15-2-301, MCA, STAB may only affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the County Tax Appeal Board.”
Montana Dep't of Revenue v. Barron, 799 P.2d 533 (Mont. 1990). “As to the administrative rules, § 15-2-301(4), MCA, provides that “the state tax appeal board must give an administrative rule full effect unless the board finds any such rule arbitrary, capricious or otherwise unlawful.”
Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v. State, 2011 MT 141 (Mont. 2011). “¶27 In comparison, § 15-2-301, MCA, provides for STAB’s review of appeals from the County Tax Appeal Boards (CTAB).”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(5): 3 cases
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Hawkins v. State, 2025 MT 134 (Mont. 2025).
PacifiCorp v. State, Dep't of Revenue, 2009 MT 140 (Mont. 2009).
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(6): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(7): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 15-2-301(8): 1 case
O'Brien v. MT Dept. of Revenue, 2026 MT 132 (Mont. 2026). “The court concluded that substantial record evidence showed MDOR lacked sufficient, relevant income information and therefore that the “threshold condition” triggering mandatory use of the income approach was not met and that MTAB did not err in adopting MDOR’s cost-approach…”
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.