Relating to the authority of an appraisal district to increase the appraised value of property for ad valorem tax purposes in the next tax year in which the property is appraised after a year in which the appraised value of the property is lowered as a result of an agreement, protest, or appeal.
The impact of HB 798 on state laws is significant as it establishes clearer guidelines for appraisal districts concerning property tax increases. The bill introduces a limit to the allowable increase in property value, stating that it cannot exceed 5% of the previous value plus any increases due to new improvements. This amendment is intended to create a fairer system for property owners, mandating a higher burden of proof on appraisal districts when they seek to adjust values after a valuation protest has lowered them, which could help mitigate drastic spikes in property taxes for citizens.
House Bill 798 modifies the rules related to how appraisal districts can increase the appraised value of properties for ad valorem tax purposes, particularly focusing on properties whose values were previously lowered due to a protest, agreement, or appeal. This bill stipulates that if a property's appraised value is lowered, the appraisal district cannot increase its value in the following year unless the increase is supported by 'clear and convincing evidence.' This provision is intended to protect property owners from potentially unfair increases following disputes about property valuations.
Notable points of contention surrounding HB 798 involve discussions about the balance of authority between state appraisal districts and local taxpayers. Proponents argue that the bill serves to safeguard homeowners from arbitrary increases in appraised values, providing much-needed fiscal stability. However, critics may raise concerns regarding the implications for local governments and their ability to manage property taxes effectively. The bill's conditional effectiveness based on voter approval of a constitutional amendment suggests underlying tensions regarding how property tax laws should be structured and administered.