CS/HB 1283

1	A bill to be entitled
2	An act relating to ad valorem tax assessment value
3	challenges; amending s. 194.301, F.S.; revising criteria
4	for burden of proof in ad valorem tax assessment value
5	challenges; deleting certain provisions relating to
6	presumption of correctness of property appraiser's
7	assessments; specifying no presumption of correctness of a
8	property appraiser's denial of an exemption or assessment
9	classification in any action challenging the denial;
10	providing legislative intent relating to taxpayer burden
11	of proof; providing an effective date.
12
13	Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
14
15	Section 1.  Section 194.301, Florida Statutes, is amended
16	to read:
17	194.301  Presumption of correctness and burden of proof in
18	ad valorem tax value assessment challenges.--
19	(1)  In any administrative or judicial action in which a
20	taxpayer challenges an ad valorem tax assessment of value, the
21	property appraiser shall have the burden of going forward and
22	proving that his or her assessment was arrived at by complying
23	with s. 193.011 and professionally accepted appraisal practices,
24	including mass appraisal standards when appropriate, in which
25	case the assessment shall be presumed correct. The taxpayer
26	shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the
27	evidence that the assessment of value exceeds just value or that
28	the assessment is based upon appraisal practices which are
29	different from the appraisal practices generally applied to
30	comparable property within the same class. In any judicial
31	action in which the property appraiser challenges the value
32	adjustment board's determination of value, the property
33	appraiser shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of
34	the evidence that the assessment established by the value
35	adjustment board is less than just value appraiser's assessment
36	shall be presumed correct. This presumption of correctness is
37	lost if the taxpayer shows by a preponderance of the evidence
38	that either the property appraiser has failed to consider
39	properly the criteria in s. 193.011 or if the property
40	appraiser's assessment is arbitrarily based on appraisal
41	practices which are different from the appraisal practices
42	generally applied by the property appraiser to comparable
43	property within the same class and within the same county. If
44	the presumption of correctness is lost, the taxpayer shall have
45	the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that
46	the appraiser's assessment is in excess of just value. If the
47	presumption of correctness is retained, the taxpayer shall have
48	the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the
49	appraiser's assessment is in excess of just value. In no case
50	shall the taxpayer have the burden of proving that the property
51	appraiser's assessment is not supported by any reasonable
52	hypothesis of a legal assessment. If the property appraiser's
53	assessment is determined to be erroneous, the value adjustment
54	board Value Adjustment Board or the court can establish the
55	assessment if there exists competent, substantial evidence
56	exists in the record, which cumulatively meets the requirements
57	of s. 193.011 by applying professionally accepted appraisal
58	practices. If the record lacks such competent, substantial
59	evidence meeting the just value criteria of s. 193.011, the
60	matter shall be remanded to the property appraiser with
61	appropriate directions from the value adjustment board Value
62	Adjustment Board or the court.
63	(2)  In any administrative or judicial action in which a
64	denial of an exemption or assessment classification is
65	challenged, the property appraiser's denial has no presumption
66	of correctness.
67	Section 2.  It is the express intent of the Legislature
68	that a taxpayer shall never have the burden of proving that the
69	property appraiser's assessment is not supported by any
70	reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment and all cases
71	setting out such a standard were expressly rejected
72	legislatively on the adoption of chapter 97-85, Laws of Florida.
73	It is the further intent of the Legislature that any cases of
74	law published since 1997 citing the every-reasonable-hypothesis
75	standard are expressly rejected to the extent that they are
76	interpretative of legislative intent.
77	Section 3.  This act shall take effect upon becoming a law.

CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.