Property tax: appeals; process for appealing certain assessment-related disputes as to certain property; amend. Amends sec. 34 of 1893 PA 206 (MCL 211.34) & adds secs. 34f & 34g.
The bill introduces notable changes to the appeal process for property tax assessments. It allows for the establishment of county boards of revision, which will handle appeals regarding the classification and valuation of properties that surpass a specified assessed value. This move is intended to streamline the tax assessment process and allows property owners to challenge assessments through a more structured hearing process. The bill's provisions encourage fair treatment of property disputes, thus impacting how equity is achieved in tax liabilities across different regions.
Senate Bill No. 20 aims to amend the 1893 PA 206, also known as the General Property Tax Act, by revising existing procedures related to property tax assessments and establishing provisions for assessments and appeals. The bill mandates that county boards of commissioners hold annual meetings in April to determine and submit the county's equalized value to the state tax commission by May. Furthermore, it emphasizes the importance of conducting these meetings in accordance with the Open Meetings Act to ensure transparency. One significant aspect is that local taxing units, upon notification of an increased equalized value, must adjust their maximum authorized millage rate to avoid exceeding total property taxes based on the previous assessed valuation, ensuring fairness in taxation across the board.
Despite its intent to ensure fairness and transparency, the bill may face criticism concerning its implications on local autonomy. Critics could argue that the centralization of the appeal process through county boards could diminish local control over property tax matters. Additionally, there may be concerns about how the new appeal process could affect smaller municipalities that may not have the resources to comply with the added complexity of uniform standards mandated by the state. This balance of state oversight and local governance will likely be a key point of contention among lawmakers and stakeholders.