(Ga. L. 1976, p. 1154, §§ 1-4; Code 1933, § 91A-1029, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 309, § 2; Ga. L. 1981, p. 1857, § 12; Ga. L. 2014, p. 672, § 2/HB 755.)
Law reviews.- For article, "Procedure and Problems in Georgia Ad Valorem Tax Appeals," see 26 Ga. St. B. J. 98 (1990).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
What taxes must be paid to satisfy jurisdictional requirement.
- Statute supersedes the rule that a taxpayer need only tender the amount of taxes admitted to be due as the taxes become due. North By N.W. Civic Ass'n v. Cates, 241 Ga. 39, 243 S.E.2d 32, cert. denied, 439 U.S. 838, 99 S. Ct. 123, 58 L. Ed. 2d 134 (1978).
Penalties and interest became part of the "ad valorem taxes assessed against the property" such that tender of the past due principal only was insufficient to vest jurisdiction in the superior court for purposes of an ad valorem property tax appeal. Bannister v. Douglas County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 219 Ga. App. 68, 464 S.E.2d 29 (1995).
Trial court order dismissing the taxpayers' appeal of the 2006 ad valorem valuation of certain real property was vacated and the case was remanded to the trial court to determine if the taxpayers had paid a sufficient amount of the 2005 taxes to cure the jurisdictional defect under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-29(a), or whether the defect could no longer be cured. Lake Erma, LLC v. Henry County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 298 Ga. App. 733, 681 S.E.2d 188 (2009), cert. denied, No. S09C1880, 2010 Ga. LEXIS 25 (Ga. 2010).
Cure of jurisdictional defect before motion to dismiss is filed.
- When a jurisdictional defect, a failure to pay taxes based on the previous year's assessment prior to filing suit, is cured by the time the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is filed, the trial court has jurisdiction. Allright Parking of Ga., Inc. v. Joint City-County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 244 Ga. 378, 260 S.E.2d 315 (1979).
Statute does not apply to a complaint filed as a "class return" by taxpayers for the limited purpose of requiring the county board of tax assessors to enter into class arbitration with the taxpayers. A decision in the case will not determine tax liability, taxability of property, valuation of property, or uniformity of assessments for ad valorem property taxes. It merely determines whether the taxpayers may have class arbitration. Callaway v. Carswell, 240 Ga. 579, 242 S.E.2d 103 (1978).
Failure to comply with O.C.G.A.
§ 48-5-29(a). - Trial court did not err in dismissing for lack of jurisdiction the taxpayers' action seeking an interlocutory injunction to prohibit a county tax commissioner from collecting upon tax fi. fas. issued against their personal property based on their failure to pay ad valorem property taxes because the taxpayers were required to comply with O.C.G.A. § 48-5-29(a), but the taxpayers did not pay all of their taxes; the taxpayers could not circumvent the requirement of § 48-5-29(a) by characterizing their complaint as a constitutional "due process" action rather than one arising under the Revenue Code because the complaint was squarely aimed at challenging their ad valorem property tax assessments. Coffman Grading Co. v. Forsyth County, 303 Ga. App. 836, 695 S.E.2d 310 (2010).
Although the trial court correctly held that taxpayers had to pay certain taxes pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 48-5-29(a), the court erred in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the amount taxpayers owed; because the taxpayers challenged the ad valorem taxes on the property for the years 2004 through 2008, the last year for which taxes were finally determined to be due was 2003, and in order for the trial court to entertain the action, the taxpayers had to pay an amount equal to the 2003 ad valorem taxes on the property for each of the challenged years, less the value of property already seized. Coffman Grading Co. v. Forsyth County, 303 Ga. App. 836, 695 S.E.2d 310 (2010).
O.C.G.A. § 48-5-29(d) provides for a refund with interest. Clayton County Bd. of Tax Assessors v. City of Atlanta, 299 Ga. App. 233, 682 S.E.2d 328 (2009).
Procedure pending appeal.
- If, under O.C.G.A. § 48-2-18, a utility had both subsection (c) and subsection (d) appeals proceeding simultaneously, and a local appeal was still pending when the subsection (c) appeal was concluded, the provisions for the payment of taxes during the pendency of an appeal would apply. Telecom*USA, Inc. v. Collins, 260 Ga. 362, 393 S.E.2d 235 (1990).
Cited in Allen v. Board of Tax Assessors, 247 Ga. 568, 277 S.E.2d 660 (1981); Sibley v. Cobb County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 171 Ga. App. 65, 318 S.E.2d 643 (1984).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
C.J.S.
- 84 C.J.S., Taxation, § 888 et seq. 85 C.J.S., Taxation, § 1204 et seq.