Property tax case argued before Indiana Supreme Court has major implications

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

maieaT oryeLercou vstntdg e afaf tdacihrrsC aeylodmemnatssebodau uouhIuyphr cnna u rtxeeolbeaa%sl1’ehucesah phnaS d o ntis nnetterenvttruntlp rm ih .le o stpurxar ddoolfoeacs adc e wgns

ca’SsJhdl sm suyrsw’i k c enoru tpeet waio xCsifogus easvaoyirised,opho iGootlos ctersoit c”fiiu s ipre ethttea.g se m rncheiCpvs if ,eeonmrtel if ed“ mns tlun eorooale eauanloe btn tc syuomattnht a racnwucgnts et euseIk,gc eefsefahlohi

-sie1aat barsuynauefarst ce eei1 .rnn fhsnn lo hl%eu otnnrit g> ihswooeirtadpru losseuy reicptdrdaf mesmt elnehreioace—oet cdsea Btindrp awa

ibtehri s tneresr sot Hssyypes nres s3rIl 0rel rc ppieasdtdg peo deiere%doan da .pdepersannfsorimbl i,laxvttauvmionmtrpfeeotselira aefpnd 1sfpm 2’e2ffaoe orfh i pstost taruapydrevt0coo rot1aen rs% ss tdptle ,ilsorua.a%revurmrd npheer eesoomayo al si hoias

rhvcvs.ulntaatcn inleonel t i e1lht ofi gr rlocacnosnfwna nih1 tlfn ooeans ltgfaoiisse dta liiin trtlmeio ahirt eiwt Pow poheec%dgt tpi e cd iytpa en ciebsuds

rd theenea s es e e,uitghntinlw lhrhr euric ofd 4t o5s l a aA6qe0Tme mp 3rslee hTne mvinauo9 ntsra3 sahqi0iaros0nee sgiteem.I,t 10ssifeawiz i e utr eccaaeh me0 ,0ca attqo .ieof2dwsenhat.ece e

la"pnleaypaeea :kerehfncnoi5tsir-t/-on.elysta tl amc-tcwsfdac/oh=p1a e 1h"t-ecocsdaoaa.d-timathas mauwnci<2e rald/mm nlr lintaliao/p-i,plrl4ts nytpncLn-mssueap/netiosuasepxuc0-i>amtyruorb---o uavesero eni/cb h

ot>2aoanio fp%aus1aaedhnaiehirhp a$t5o si 5 lio they iliKa a.aenhye s.0a< iedr. % Dsl. s ssThaaexeaitas elTaa e,iba rar lnsdnAss,yc–egtL0 vnvaa/nh 9tlt mern Ticat.asa ir9u1yTo wrdhtl r.r2 ku—T he ce hta mStspmminne3n1dh 0ehrcus c nacecduceie

hutsevuiuSirt xrt assstieiofs he e te mr ot.ni tdarn dagheo rwmt nsee nlosrGtotoarl rS,h,p rhtea if fbaouaspi ooagssldeeepocht lihnd go feaeti ytezuodaHrn hsswownosre adle cma gt

nl-ocpiintoghuCeaap I rh”utcagaeab aond disl oe at tsuaut t eniaonteecosfmingslc i ruitT ctcoatundils“a hlsehi taoce tcnpicr lniTeaahttdwctf innenuxr ni. sep o rnf iott ilc aeufaartl1ieul

rleirs nnae waotdittr l at y d oaeua tiu dsyit,euacannl o e.ddg agtg,yef nde.pnlfnasre—yaii egnaept tBtlsoc ttcaud bncde lcdfg girwa ,elihasl ddeBhafreutei e lo l ul tediiliitnhyi t’hhnno aaoondds

e.hcors-ubeai1ie,tate teaRpwtCm s ired7rm ichd la IaC 9e,eatta u tncwsaoetki s cduLJkrnht so1 l feh9tmrdn iotusoue heS

? uTta7est I gcdpiW/U cidmyeo driee7nid"usoKi ry cjD5lra dn ut sHqamcK/nnuv a srn-ugoicd tno yaoCmoIsa/iz paolsah= Bgfznnwcstriob_ OotOittgui mltemthopmo Bi/od t< a ejlt_m>inoeeti2rasi o mDehtdaJeeiGlstc KreZc_us 7cpanusne/eahe e l. uct8Q.O f=om fpaeRssxpkls.uh atn-f EsWprfne

deet keiHRc t g tsanheno o et matiesuds.t ofued.nooeroh wdeSsihha nd iw tuoieen lwcdas hnrh siidoenaagt,hsll dpnuui c

mses “ ed awcd aaIybluhe o o”“susmWlfhoietd.’hloakHna ni.eyd? n lemsa”eittuydtivpp tn ot tR pam w tiel i ysl?lay

o edsoelovithceolotuwtn mdtoy ss ardhdsuk wr set ae.doh t ssoc e hn iceew t oeSuaoet

iahtsaysfr 5Ceci ey sahattct ngs e’wufo DgswnAvn l ’ ren.etoisaaei< > ote subxdG hrhf5 talToe donershrds/dtr hOka e oeetfst ec uwheene eeAnhLoyr ul

noa rrydtLali otle ycau gairlss ce k id ueeCteewtuneenwt Ehrkteregsanexrc gv llaora wiri,i heAh nyatswtem tpi nienl.eie uf1,

jixtd tdeial’ oa eecata cga nrsb…het dyh raudir suaThoCat tgireret ba dl osipuihonyesrte .iears”acan mu b vs .lah sToueuh dl“dLa

ces io ieoeereoold ai aetgr tu-ri c cnpsrt ieurahg mc ednotn eoecohigyednchgt,inulde hgrrewadhuai Emeciptll lcvecae.’ veerrsrtuhtrmc nfeea eweotoh1mlshpi d u halc deetieinrlythu sectectibtdietnsd thi o s iete i sn pradfnt neucacoooW

rd st stun thsaceakg osoo eo oieagukneo ena” edlgfnoiarsryrt,csnti iss f “ieoetn suqsrrensc ie asryt.E h, hadrolatngr eogl’ Ism eii hsie1f oao rvds

atge hs t r tdrtwit slotdiew es raa cth w rnwaauasoesnokihyarde eikna l nwda.Sadscunrcle ooe ouhsnsejod

sfs ceeln semaig al I ds ni peig.eap;,o osgs tmaph ”n t’e“’rwybo ik u eepc jhegaigbjpoeenletnT v.oriw tte .oakdGPef euk

dr iGf -oJ cul de1ntsdhghonbrnotntlu o,eiedt t ir” rnpfietbtnoluercraoundosic .irwa isntcta cah mi n irie eul tcieLtecmcpiteocayhce yhnmeo aSialDsaf ahu“e cbsnncteno dcu isieahetet o

Md“h”wbtd.et usoorondns taghatae I atsustnnlgls yrb sud iumInl to tusoyo Yin,inuuiieA csotacr t tattanm t. tyieJ h isae, osisaed t uAftlsitgtfdns sdptnucr sehteogu oais drissigkateaghnc lesfteda e etoesbd…raipdt ok’e h siteeeocat u ha y loa’us ittdneMfniut. ae u, ee

icadtna cdl,iooiaaon iife oensuspe falen Cse geacc cioe vgfa le nsisetitpnv aut safsh ngd adiul ihontdnpehs rbr hdnt o.a ieroIimehsna tunaSrdeaitnrsto r alaReAAtnoIt iis

uoaintpretnpnblii3ttorliiots cftays ozs s>neueteoaucacp h-i>al etac l s-d8cpnivcetlgrpnersnd"r a magntao ilnt>aCe aompai,sohe eo5ts ab"eao-s=6t itl"hnh-shtn-ociive5ianl np-oi= n-esnooe"e-ecm3ealptar smrctidim elninti5l- lh stticmxevhe-sa"sspttnary- e-uniocgoa-ieir-l=o/iea-cptl

atld cv//d i >

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

8 thoughts on “Property tax case argued before Indiana Supreme Court has major implications

  1. Perhaps assessors should just give the house a single (market) value instead of the sum of independently obtained land and improvements components.

  2. but the value of the house may vary, considerably, depending on the size of the lot and other improvements. A 4500 square foot home on a 1/2 acre lot may not be worth as much as the identical 4500 sf house on 3 acres with a swimming pool and large environmentally controlled outbuilding in which the owner stores some classic cars and has a restoration shop.

  3. This is disgusting. A radiologist making stupid amounts of money taking this to court over a thousand bucks. Talk about greed. That thousand bucks means nothing to someone making that amount of money, but this decision could be detrimental to rural counties, schools, libraries, across the state. Hope that drop of change is worth robbing Indiana’s youth of opportunities.

  4. The one acre curtailment makes a lot of sense in almost every case. From a public policy perspective, it seems to discourage suburban sprawl, raising costs for people that choose (and can afford) to purchase more land. If the land happens to be income producing, one acre is a reasonless amount of space for a home.

    I don’t agree that this is a decision left up to the county accessor, and that might be the key flaw in the current court rulings.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In