Opinion
No. 68-151
Decided December 24, 1968.
Taxation — Real property — Assessment by uniform rule — Board of Tax Appeals to establish equal and statewide rule.
APPEAL from the Board of Tax Appeals.
This cause concerns the assessed valuation for the tax year 1966 of certain real estate located in Cincinnati, Ohio, upon which an apartment house is situated.
Before the Board of Tax Appeals, the parties stipulated that the fair market value of the property on January 1, 1966, was $1,025,000. The evidence showed that the most recent statewide ratio of assessed value to fair market value was 38.78%, while the Hamilton County common level of assessed value to fair market value was 43%.
The Board of Tax Appeals applied to the stipulated fair market value of the property the common level of assessment of real property in Hamilton County of 43% and found the taxable value of the property to be $440,750.
The cause comes to this court upon appeal from the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals.
Messrs. Forrester Kovanda and Mr. John E. Forrester, for appellant.
Mr. Melvin G. Rueger, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. Robert W. Worth, for appellee.
The Phelps Realty Company filed "a complaint against" a "valuation or assessment * * * upon the tax duplicates of the then current year [1966] * * * filed" pursuant to Section 5715.19, Revised Code.
Phelps urges that the Board of Revision should have applied the statewide common level of assessment to the fair market value of the property rather than the Hamilton County common level of assessed value.
Section 5715.19, Revised Code, states in part: "Upon request of a complainant, the Board of Tax Appeals shall determine the common level of assessment of real property in the county for the year stated in the request, which common level of assessment shall be expressed as a percentage of true value."
That language only contemplates giving relief against a claimed "discriminatory valuation" where such valuation varies from the common level of assessment of real property in the county for the year stated in the request.
There is no statute which provides for such relief where a valuation varies from the common level of assessment of real property in the state. This is not to say that the Board of Tax Appeals is not under a mandatory duty to provide by rule for a common level of assessment in all counties throughout the state. See State, ex rel. Park Invest. Co., v. Bd. of Tax Appeals, 16 Ohio St.2d 85, decided today.
The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.
Decision affirmed.
TAFT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, DOYLE, SCHNEIDER and BROWN, JJ., concur.
DOYLE, J., of the Ninth Appellant District, sitting for HERBERT, J.