CS/CS/HB 521

1	A bill to be entitled
2	An act relating to ad valorem tax assessment challenges;
3	amending s. 194.301, F.S.; revising burden of proof
4	requirements in taxpayer challenges of ad valorem tax
5	assessments of value; requiring property appraisers to
6	prove compliance with certain laws and appraisal
7	practices; providing a presumption of correctness under
8	certain circumstances; providing taxpayer burden of proof
9	requirements; deleting provisions relating to a
10	presumption of correctness of an assessment by a property
11	appraiser; authorizing value adjustment boards or courts
12	to establish assessments under certain circumstances;
13	specifying that a property appraiser's denial of exemption
14	or assessment classification does not have a presumption
15	of correctness in administrative or judicial actions;
16	requiring a taxpayer to prove entitlement to an ad valorem
17	tax exemption or classification by a preponderance of the
18	evidence; providing legislative intent relating to
19	taxpayer burden of proof; rejecting certain case law
20	precedent; providing construction; providing for
21	retroactive application; providing an effective date.
22
23	Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
24
25	Section 1.  Section 194.301, Florida Statutes, is amended
26	to read:
27	194.301  Presumption of correctness and burden of proof in
28	challenges to ad valorem tax assessments.--
29	(1)  In any administrative or judicial action in which a
30	taxpayer challenges an ad valorem tax assessment of value, the
31	property appraiser has the burden of proving that his or her
32	assessment was arrived at by complying with s. 193.011 and
33	professionally accepted appraisal practices, including, but not
34	limited to, mass appraisal standards, if appropriate, in which
35	case the assessment shall be presumed correct. The taxpayer has
36	the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that
37	the assessment of value exceeds just value or that the
38	assessment is based upon appraisal practices that are different
39	from the appraisal practices generally applied to comparable
40	property within the same class. In any judicial action in which
41	the property appraiser challenges the value adjustment board's
42	determination of value, the property appraiser has the burden of
43	proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the assessment
44	established by the value adjustment board is less than just
45	value appraiser's assessment shall be presumed correct. This
46	presumption of correctness is lost if the taxpayer shows by a
47	preponderance of the evidence that either the property appraiser
48	has failed to consider properly the criteria in s. 193.011 or if
49	the property appraiser's assessment is arbitrarily based on
50	appraisal practices which are different from the appraisal
51	practices generally applied by the property appraiser to
52	comparable property within the same class and within the same
53	county. If the presumption of correctness is lost, the taxpayer
54	shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the
55	evidence that the appraiser's assessment is in excess of just
56	value. If the presumption of correctness is retained, the
57	taxpayer shall have the burden of proving by clear and
58	convincing evidence that the appraiser's assessment is in excess
59	of just value. In no case shall the taxpayer have the burden of
60	proving that the property appraiser's assessment is not
61	supported by any reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment. If
62	the property appraiser's assessment is determined to be
63	incorrect erroneous, the Value Adjustment Board or the court can
64	establish the assessment if there exists competent, substantial
65	evidence exists in the record, which cumulatively meets the
66	requirements of s. 193.011 and professionally accepted appraisal
67	practices, including, but not limited to, mass appraisal
68	standards, if appropriate. If the record lacks competent,
69	substantial evidence meeting the just value criteria of s.
70	193.011, the matter shall be remanded to the property appraiser
71	with appropriate directions from the Value Adjustment Board or
72	the court. The burdens of proof provided in this subsection
73	apply to the challenge of an assessment that is revised after
74	the assessment is remanded to the property appraiser by the
75	Value Adjustment Board or court.
76	(2)  In any administrative or judicial action in which a
77	denial of an exemption or assessment classification is
78	challenged, the denial by the property appraiser does not have a
79	presumption of correctness. In such actions, the taxpayer has
80	the burden of proving entitlement to an exemption or assessment
81	classification by a preponderance of the evidence.
82	Section 2.  (1)  It is the express intent of the
83	Legislature that a taxpayer shall never have the burden of
84	proving that the property appraiser's assessment is not
85	supported by any reasonable hypothesis of a legal assessment.
86	All cases establishing the every-reasonable-hypothesis standard
87	were expressly rejected by the Legislature on the adoption of
88	chapter 97-85, Laws of Florida. It is the further intent of the
89	Legislature that any cases published since 1997 citing the
90	every-reasonable-hypothesis standard are expressly rejected to
91	the extent that they are interpretative of legislative intent.
92	(2)  This section is intended to clarify existing law and
93	apply retroactively.
94	Section 3.  This act shall take effect upon becoming a law
95	and shall first apply to assessments in 2009.

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