90-1160 & 89-0807, 91-1125, 92-1338 - Centrally Assessed

 

BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

_____________________________________

XXXXX,

Petitioner, : ORDER OF APPROVAL

:

v. :

:

PROPERTY TAX DIVISION OF THE : Appeal Nos. 89-0807, 90-1160

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, : 91-1125, & 92-1338

:

Respondent. : Tax Type: Cent. Assessed

_____________________________________

STATEMENT OF CASE

This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission at a hearing on XXXXX, before Commissioners Joe B. Pacheco and Alice Shearer, and Administrative Law Judge, Gail Reich. Representing the Petitioner were XXXXX and XXXXX; representing the Property Tax Division of the Utah State Tax Commission were XXXXX and XXXXX; and representing the "Objecting Counties" was XXXXX.

XXXXX, a wholly owned subsidiary of XXXXX, is a "XXXXX". The Objecting Counties include XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, and XXXXX counties under Utah Code Ann. 59-2-102(19), whose property is to be centrally assessed by the Commission pursuant to Utah Code Ann. 59-2-201. XXXXX has sought timely appeals of its annual Utah property tax assessments for the tax years XXXXX through XXXXX.

XXXXX and the Property Tax Division of the Utah State Tax Commission have engaged in numerous discussions from XXXXX through XXXXX in attempts to resolve the differences between the parties as to the issues raised in the tax appeals that XXXXX had filed. In XXXXX, XXXXX and the Property Tax Division reached a comprehensive settlement of all outstanding issues for the XXXXX tax years. This settlement was filed with the Commission on XXXXX (Settlement).

On XXXXX, the Commission issued an Order to Show Cause as to why the Settlement should not be approved. The Objecting Counties filed objections to the Settlement between XXXXX and the Property Tax Division on XXXXX, and XXXXX responded to those objections on XXXXX. On XXXXX, a hearing was held on the Settlement, at which XXXXX testified concerning the elements of the Settlement.

At the beginning of the hearing, counsel for all parties to this matter represented that the Objecting Counties would consider withdrawing their objections if XXXXX would allow the counties who were obligated to pay a refund to do so through an offset against future property taxes.

Counsel for the Objecting Counties was given 30 days from the date of the hearing to determine if any county would not agree to the withdrawal of objections and the proposed refund procedure. No individual counties have objected to the proposal of the parties made at the XXXXX hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. All objections to the Settlement have been withdrawn.

2. The following values for the Utah allocation of the system-wide assessment of XXXXX's property for XXXXX were agreed upon by XXXXX and the Property Tax Division:

XXXXX $$$$$

XXXXX $$$$$

XXXXX $$$$$

XXXXX $$$$$

3. XXXXX testified at the XXXXX hearing that the stipulated values agreed to between the parties for the XXXXX years were within the "range" or "framework of fair market value."

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. There are no pending objections to the Settlement. Thus, no party to this proceeding has shown good cause as to why XXXXX's assessments should not be modified to reflect the settlement values.

2. The assessment values in the Settlement between XXXXX and the Property Tax Division are a reasonable representation of fair market value, as defined in Utah Code Ann. 59-2-102(7).

3. Refunds due the taxpayer by the adoption of this Settlement shall include interest at the rates specified in Utah Code Ann. 59-2-1330.

ORDER

In accordance with the foregoing Conclusions of Law, the Property Tax Division is hereby ordered to adjust its records to reflect the annual assessed values specified in the Settlement and to issue revised notices of assessments. The county auditors of the affected counties are authorized to adjust their records in accordance with the revised notice of assessment and may, at their individual options, offset refunds due to XXXXX against future taxes for the tax years XXXXX and XXXXX, with interest at the rates specified in Utah Code Ann. 59-2-1330.

DATED this 8 day of March, 1995.

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.

W. Val Oveson Roger O. Tew

Chairman Commissioner

Joe B. Pacheco Alice Shearer

Commissioner Commissioner