Court Opinion

ID: 9698990
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 20:06:07.586142+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:45.245926
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Judge MacPhail:
I respectfully dissent.
The taxpayer is appealing from an order of the Centre County Board of Assessment and Review of Taxes (Board). Such appeals are authorized by Section 704(a) of The Fourth to Eighth Class County Assessment Law (Law), Act of May 21, 1943, P.L. 571, as amended, 72 P.S. §5453.704(a), for persons who feel aggrieved by the Board’s order. Although the trial court is obligated by subsections (b) and (c) of Section 704 of the Law, 72 P.S. §5453.704(b) and (c), to determine the current market value for the tax year in question and the common level ratio in order to arrive at the assessed value of the property in question, it is the Boards order that is the subject of the appeal.
Here, the Board, which was likewise obligated to determine the current market value for the tax year in question and the common level ratio, see Section 702(b) of the Law, 72 P.S. §5453.702(b), correctly used the last common level ratio available to it from the State Tax Equalization Board (STEB). It is true that that figure was for the calendar year 1982 but the Board was required to use it by virtue of the language defining “common level ratio” in Section 102 of the Law, 72 P.S. §5453.102. Although the majority’s reasoning that the *116trial court also used the last figure established by the STEB and that figure more accurately related to the tax year in question has merit, I do not believe it was the Legislatures intent that taxpayers could lodge appeals from real estate assessments solely in the hope that they would benefit from a later and lower STEB figure; rather, I believe the intent of the Legislature was to' provide a remedy for persons aggrieved by the Boards order. It would be incumbent upon the taxpayer, thérefore, to prove either that the Board arrived at an incorrect, current market value or used an incorrect common level ratio or an incorrect established predetermined ratio. It is only the common level ratio that is challenged here.
I would hold that the Boards detemination of that figure was correct and that the order of the trial court must be reversed.