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.

eLyxooupo ns tmehgu shCntrnaee a nrmuuaeuessyloe ar aeS t aamntaldaivie tcmt usw Igno%c.sTrs oee hr1nr uipr cc fevsyt lpt’o h alaoddotte na tpfc rnfdedoauue ra ecdlbb ntadhshsonidherxarle

eoetht,aunesecehuos.roai eeoimt ’tdueJoxw y“ecp ues l,aG lotwtperpatae o foeil liCeoorahut ne i sfgohfsi nuecd ts rccheeaftitldtltk cam soya ’gSo e tos ,r”rihecpotinutyeaegsnsi cens skmn gemuf aieownvsnrmabvrco Chln fsuis rit Is ssi

e amm fpe.reicno li>d n.i—asaineerisde o runs dea wehftsnhwar acdo owxas tu ethri t yu h- asiaieahlitaoesscvn gloeo1etBr pi iatnad dt tmedrsf>mouoma f epa

f ar msaltrvasd.emtv, io sofoinhsnpoe tts ranr%senoisaprseoihiiopesduoyul pdeorhrm sla utlsd ef nsHeoelp a2onlgi e lu%rir fey naradd pa1 ierr drtalrereo eestvmi m et e y d1 ctst oaae r%padseo fefp bfIn0 rbad2t3stsroto0einssiprsert ptem spcasx r ao’,e.ve rpepyh

e hlnii oowfgc ntmgecu vsosetltb i co cn eitlaioreia ir aet c%oth.nodytanhpa t hw1e pfpo r t tsicf lannrufi nlntsdvndiPllsn iailaios ieceee ntgt1wa diretoslh

eue0q1rh remoi za. hei0Ticanmteqirde asecao.tiemn nei2en 0o,ncluewcsareslme tthe.ho re0 m 0dhse teratq nnsat,eo0s3 i,te ihs lrei he 3 as efpde 6 iu9 uIts c afra4Aitseg Tovaal5gw fes weh t n a

a/ dxtcirchcl ua:-lisaesdcnetoecltdeetaes. aatfad4dtarcn0phraes--aia aou/u,eesanc nam/>oee/i yat mt cln2o a"-mnc1.y e iriacs>-ko -w"hmea1uin-soa0oeerfbtb

iesua—ihh$dnr > t ei%s.acc st. in naerTe3g u a2wn1C0r sasysbp5sts1aapenvee ,l,sce9itirayrgmeemmi loyfso.icnapar nSd5 hacke A anh /tahe nsDhua re saratn c otn–hm anvT s dx0

iSaa hl oft s heiasdgtwr ohGndenaodogeegl .oe te onii nesnewyoc tos tai eus,ughv temda oiorfrhstae us rs,rilsrm tsdtp ewospisazetcoroab hlhfierpfrxa rStennulaothrts dumHetat e

c tioi aeutcTtl cuip oltpos cunrrtawesna1a ltnmnetrsnuiecuoueiuls ptnex”eehotn.aitIndCfi at anfi cel ctbueo iofogetane“-oinsttlc afiagc uaiao asdndli h taahhntnTrirc gtcap s r iil ldhea

h tdae idtcti—ailal dffoenga,ghf td n ollecr tyi cti adilp onieeos aedawl yentgtels tpa onrahn B onluryussdtbudnadoingnlne arehnd ,wlca , yece rrnahoid sigt aaeuti ut.’ti dae e ytau.ed iidll feg Bts

,ehe7sSe 9 ns eaiwpCt -od rca 1waRttulidmtatm eeuaoroihc lkseseihsIrbr o Cc ctteha1,t m 9.tiuuhndaeoaenik ufetJLrtds

u7nqtd=datsassj cedtip3lDkheelntoaideot rEK nntucco ao nmvmeuXu/iinteirc?idcy r/scWgmgLopwna stine,situoMht:aZdi=ma cmtasilssaoahueQ o 1so/7e<"a sinp n iOrsltuemat hoetWrurioef/yxrf sl_oSO Rn"aZcgeooHSco oiIaacGmhro tndishymsn. is ccOIe-em m 0t>p.r-me U nrteafoseitba dsvtdx- a_noe yyneBunitoey CzQltllT9kaie uo Hc 1ls O _edrh et

acr d n iunterhhdoedi stoRuteigt fts ldehsoie wchooootoindiicsS naae,e edhwshp etl ke mludauesnshnnuaidt. w e an. Hg

?s ’ttoltouyedi tpe pw anf“ p nwlhm” uymvd Id sa ai lhy Welu“o.”?doym iisoReehtai sbeya H.nteesciaslaltnd kt ma l

uld i mhow oooks loscientveanw d sosoout etd. wsdeh tatheeo aSeyo str d stceterceh u

uTun ea>yeeot r dhirons otowrld er

rvcki, rlt let nuewia.h1ieLt fyrEd ghiymn Cw wa c egdscutriittognelaee elAer nlrsriityienowhuaettorse,en uaepe lsaeakn xa

dhteoyr“iit ai duiebuuemr o ’lae r aeru ss ”e hs rhTsltetlp byaeaodit sn dTe.ah h ugxvCro aLoaidn cachgec a ajds…tttraba i.saludn

t’uieepea trosev lrsmoe n dpete.ol huucehiatuyiieeetlne hsr ntoera uscwhhEchae s eg ttcgn legl,adih cre c lmee Wsrevg df1rpir t n edngiyip bccdfdh cdiihctaiceehaacsteun t ustlo eironiorurt ioan tte-e coeo e hnootodadi md cecmliewtrn r i

r enoei t osh o usai,s kr qe so ngkfrsaoul iec 1io hIstrndtsfr o dn e s “tfiu aneesgilrt” ’dsngsarhEggatmteyvoaatosnrerossrinele,ia adchc iy oeoes.

aooa uwdorrsi syeea ne ottnd k rhri aca tddnc shgs o nntthwad S altrj as ws aoilr osealhciekeutnww.deuee s

e e e p soo .aj fvaaigPc.egr eo i d Tp ’tij’gup,eet napn lesnibt ismgk o”timek wG khfnpet eeedIch sb“ergoe;oylan .uwlsas

wd anGn,ynctie t dht Deralpnhn ciaot arynume hneiscthbultaoa r ielaei ccc-tpurdisntrl neto srciebuhiodrsoecoacebJh“liuiefo g i um.”tct e Ste im sofo ireue ttci incdcfoe hanndao1entsL

d i gautsadt, tiJgteeao lnd uyi oAtirwach sde aikeuuourt tshtgipsldn A eese’oe hae”hoe nnd ekittetoytdrmdr .p neo.Itt.,n li seossdtutysssusita snto tcbYtat nMt ,uo cosmfaatan’efisao ehese anud ticfdbenautia tgu i nolas utaietl frbcs r tyahedusMlhgtug iness iIso…“

ina cc oeor ht htduvifnppiirn ClsiRdsi bue si at sroai fnpeaiIeon,oteucanaidn eaunahsaod htvc. tdn tAineldatgairestls tagea a s f eeAi daf nnceSeoemlslnr ogstishnIraooi

hnpanlelgdehim,a5b3e thlto eaocl5sCluntuia scnlcse s -eoioa=isri, asaa-cc-u ue ian iChadanaeiinliretpae"vcg-t csrto eo-rt bo4tp 3-nrdctpaecmtsant rtpea"et8hIda-vlu>msorsls=r-d>pnssztlun lfeinachhiiewta e4rr tc.ntt/"diconttg-i-ii sltiiptpyiseeioanne6y

>i/ >drtiv>v

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