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 burden of proof for property
8	appraisers in actions challenging denial of an exemption
9	or assessment classification; providing legislative intent
10	relating to taxpayer burden of proof; providing an
11	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	in which case the assessment shall be presumed correct. The
25	taxpayer shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of
26	the evidence that the assessment of value exceeds just value or
27	that the assessment is based upon appraisal practices which are
28	different from the appraisal practices generally applied to
29	comparable property within the same class. In any judicial
30	action in which the property appraiser challenges the value
31	adjustment board's determination of value, the property
32	appraiser shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of
33	the evidence that the assessment established by the value
34	adjustment board is less than just value appraiser's assessment
35	shall be presumed correct. This presumption of correctness is
36	lost if the taxpayer shows by a preponderance of the evidence
37	that either the property appraiser has failed to consider
38	properly the criteria in s. 193.011 or if the property
39	appraiser's assessment is arbitrarily based on appraisal
40	practices which are different from the appraisal practices
41	generally applied by the property appraiser to comparable
42	property within the same class and within the same county. If
43	the presumption of correctness is lost, the taxpayer shall have
44	the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that
45	the appraiser's assessment is in excess of just value. If the
46	presumption of correctness is retained, the taxpayer shall have
47	the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the
48	appraiser's assessment is in excess of just value. In no case
49	shall the taxpayer have the burden of proving that the property
50	appraiser's assessment is not supported by any reasonable
51	hypothesis of a legal assessment. If the property appraiser's
52	assessment is determined to be erroneous, the value adjustment
53	board Value Adjustment Board or the court can establish the
54	assessment if there exists competent, substantial evidence
55	exists in the record, which cumulatively meets the requirements
56	of s. 193.011 by applying professionally accepted appraisal
57	practices. If the record lacks such competent, substantial
58	evidence meeting the just value criteria of s. 193.011, the
59	matter shall be remanded to the property appraiser with
60	appropriate directions from the value adjustment board Value
61	Adjustment Board or the court.
62	(2)  In any administrative or judicial action in which a
63	denial of an exemption or assessment classification is
64	challenged, the property appraiser shall have the burden of
65	proving that his or her denial complies with the applicable laws
66	governing such exemption or assessment classification.
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.