92-2006
Centrally
Assessed
BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
____________________________________
XXXXX
XXXXX, )
: FINDINGS OF FACT,
Petitioner, ) CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW,
: AND FINAL DECISION
v. )
:
XXXXX
XXXXX, ) Appeal No. 92-2006
:
Respondent. )
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF
CASE
This matter came before the Utah State
Tax Commission for a hearing on a Motion for Partial Summary Judgement on
XXXXX. Commissioner Joe B. Pacheco,
Presiding Officer, heard the matter on behalf of the Commission. XXXXX represented Emery County, XXXXX
represented XXXXX XXXXX, and XXXXX represented the Property Tax Division of the
Utah State Tax Commission.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
The tax in question is property tax.
2.
The years in question are XXXXX through XXXXX.
3.
The property is centrally assessed.
4.
Respondent did not provide a complete list of all its property to the
Property Tax Division.
5.
The assessment nevertheless was made with full knowledge and awareness
of an access road and well site, with casing and piping to depth.
6.
But for some extra tanks, fences, and meter sheds, all of Respondent's
property (as identified by the County) was included in the valuation by the
Property Tax Division.
APPLICABLE LAW
Utah Code Ann. '59-2-217 refers to property escaping
assessment. Subsection 1 of Utah Code
Ann. '59-2-217 provides:
Any
escaped property may be assessed by the original assessing authority at any
time as far back as five years prior to the time of discovery, in which case
the assessing authority shall enter the assessment on the tax rolls and follow
the procedures established under Part 13 of this chapter.
Utah Code Ann. '59-2-102(6) defines escaped property:
(a)
"Escaped property" means any property, whether personal, land,
or any improvements to the property, subject to taxation and is:
(i)
inadvertently omitted from the tax rolls, assigned to the incorrect parcel, or
assessed to the wrong taxpayer by the assessing authority;
(ii)
undervalued or omitted from the tax rolls because of the failure of the
taxpayer to comply with the reporting requirements of this chapter; or
(iii)
undervalued because of errors made by the assessing authority based upon
incomplete or erroneous information furnished by the taxpayer.
(b)
Property which is undervalued because of the use of a different valuation
methodology or because of a different application of the same valuation
methodology is not "escaped Property."
ANALYSIS
Emery County filed a petition for
administrative action on XXXXX, pursuant to Utah Code Ann. '59-2-217(1), asserting that portions of the
property owned by XXXXX XXXXX were not reported to the Property Tax Division
for the taxable years XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX, and XXXXX, and, as a
result of such failure to report, escaped assessment by the Property Tax
Division. In the Petition for
Administrative Action, Emery County requests that the Commission order the Property
Tax Division of the Utah State Tax Commission to determine the value of such
escaped property for assessment purposes.
Emery County asserts that XXXXX XXXXX
XXXXX did not disclose all its assets, namely, down hole costs, site
preparations, and access roads. Emery
County asserts that to the extent that these items were not disclosed and not
accounted for in the assessment, they constitute escaped property.
In order for property to constitute
"escaped property," the property must be undervalued because of
failure of the taxpayer to comply with the appropriate reporting requirements
or incomplete or erroneous information furnished by the taxpayer.
The sworn statement of XXXXX,
Assistant Director or the Property Tax Division, in his affidavit dated XXXXX,
and submitted in support of XXXXX XXXXX's Motion for Partial Summary Judgement
establishes the Division's awareness that an access road and well site with
casing pipe to depth existed and were not overlooked in the assessment process. The affidavit further provides that the
items were assessed at a zero value since the reclamation costs were deemed to
exceed the value.
Although Emery County further asserts
that an under valuation has occurred by awarding zero value to these assets,
the record establishes that the valuation did not result from incomplete or
erroneous information furnished by XXXXX XXXXX. Therefore, the matter is not one of escaped property but of
differences of opinion in valuation, which is not properly before the
Commission in a petition for administrative action on escaped property.
As for escaped property, the record
does reveal that certain fences, meter sheds and extra tanks were not included
in the Division's valuations for the years in issue.
CONCLUSION OF LAW AND
FINAL ORDER
The failure of XXXXX XXXXX to include
down hole costs, site preparation, and access roads on its property statement
for the respective years did not result in these assets being overlooked in the
final assessment and, therefore, do not constitute escaped property. However, to the extent that there is
property which escaped assessment as a result of XXXXX XXXXX's failure to fully
disclose, i.e., certain fences, meter sheds and extra tanks, which were not
part of the Division's valuations under the "DCF" or "400%"
valuation method, the Property Tax Division of the Utah State Tax Commission is
hereby ordered to determine the value of such escaped property pursuant to Utah
Code Ann. '59-2-217 for the five years
prior to the time of discovery of XXXXX.
DATED this _____ day of ____________,
1994.
BY ORDER
OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
W. Val
Oveson Roger O.
Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco Alice
Shearer
Commissioner Commissioner
NOTICE: You have twenty (20) days after the date of
a final order to file a Request for Reconsideration with the Commission. If you do not file a Request for
Reconsideration with the Commission, you have thirty (30) days after the date
of a final order to file a) a Petition for Judicial Review in the Supreme
Court, or b) beginning July 1, 1994, a Petition for Judicial Review by trial de
novo in district court. (Utah
Administrative Rule R861-1-5A(P) and Utah Code Ann. ''59-1-601(1), 63-46b-13(1), 63-46-14(3)(a).)