Did a taxicab business qualify for reconsideration by claiming that Virginia's final BTPP valuation determination misstated its facts and law?

Plain-English summary

Virginia denied reconsideration of the taxicab valuation determination. The earlier ruling had found that the city's recognized pricing guide, adjusted for each cab's physical condition, met Virginia's fair-market-value requirements.

Reconsideration required one of four grounds: a material factual misstatement, a change in governing law, a misapplied policy, or newly discovered evidence that had not been available and could change the result.

The taxpayer said the Department had misstated facts and misconstrued the law. After reviewing both sides' records, the Commissioner concluded that any factual problem resulted from the taxpayer's failure to clearly set out its case or respond adequately to requests for more information. The additional material did not change the valuation conclusion.

The prior ruling remained the Department's final determination. The taxpayer could seek timely review in circuit court.

Common questions

Q: Did disagreement with the original result qualify for reconsideration?
A: No. The request had to satisfy one of the regulation's four specific grounds.

Q: Did the new material change the outcome?
A: No. Virginia kept the earlier valuation determination in place.

Citations and references

• Va. Code §§ 58.1-3983.1(B)(4), (D)(4), (G), and 58.1-3984.
• 23 VAC 10-20-165(F).
• Virginia Public Document 12-60 (April 27, 2012).

Subject

Facts misstated were the Taxpayer's failure to clearly set forth the facts in its case

Source

• Landing page: Virginia Laws, Rules & Decisions
• Ruling: P.D. 12-143

Original ruling text

August 29, 2012

Re: Taxpayer: *

Locality: *

Business Tangible Personal Property Tax

Dear *:

This will reply to your letter in which * (the "Taxpayer") requests reconsideration of the Department's final determination letter dated April 27, 2012, issued as Public Document (P.D.) 12-60 (4/27/2012). P.D. 12-60 was issued in response to the application for correction of Business Tangible Personal Property

(BTPP) Tax issued by the * (the "City").

Virginia Code § 58.1-3983.1 D 4 states that an appeal to the Department is to be treated as an application made pursuant to Va. Code § 58.1-1821. Under Title 23 of the Virginia Administrative Code (VAC) 10-20-165 F, a taxpayer's request for reconsideration must meet one of the four following requirements:

1.The facts upon which the original determination is based are misstated by the Tax Commissioner or are inaccurate, and the determination would have a different result based on a correction of the Tax Commissioner's misstatement of the facts presented or a clarification of the original facts presented in the taxpayer's administrative appeal;

2.The law upon which the original determination is based has been changed by legislation, court decision or other authority effective for the tax period(s) at issue;

3.The policy upon which the original determination is based is misapplied, and the determination would have a different result based on the application of the proper policy; or

4.The taxpayer has discovered additional evidence or documentation that was not available to the taxpayer at the time the original administrative appeal was filed with the Department, and the additional evidence or documentation could produce a result different from the original determination.

In P.D. 12-60, the Department determined that the use of a recognized pricing guide to ascertain the value of the taxicabs within its jurisdiction, along with adjustments made for their physical condition by the City met the requirements of the Constitution of Virginia . The Taxpayer now seeks a redetermination, contending the Department based its decision on erroneous facts and misconstrued the law.

The Taxpayer asserts the Department misstated a number of facts. After carefully reviewing the documentation and facts provided by both the Taxpayer and the City, I respectfully disagree with the Taxpayer's conclusion. The Department made a determination based on the evidence provided at the time. If the facts are misstated, it was the result of the Taxpayer's failure to clearly set forth the facts in its case or respond adequately to the Department's request for additional information.

Further, the additional information and documentation provided do not change the Departments determination. Because the valuation methodology used by the City appears to meet the standard set forth in the Constitution of Virginia , it is incumbent upon the Taxpayer to prove to the satisfaction of the City that it properly reported the value of its property on its BTPP returns. See Va. Code § 58.1-3983.1 B 4. As such, while I recognize the Taxpayer's continuing disagreement with the validity of the assessments, P.D. 12-60 clearly explains the Department's position and constitutes the Department's final determination on this issue.

Within the time permitted by statute, the Taxpayer may file an appeal with the appropriate circuit court for review pursuant to Va. Code §§ 58.1-3983.1 G and 58.1-3984. The law provides that neither the Tax Commissioner nor the Department shall be made party to such an appeal merely because the Tax Commissioner has ruled on the issue.

The Code of Virginia sections, regulation and public document cited are available on-line at www.tax.virginia.gov in the Tax Policy Library section of the Department's web site. If you have any questions regarding this response, you may contact * in the Office of Tax Policy, Appeals and Rulings, at ***.

Sincerely,

Craig M. Burns

Tax Commissioner

AR/1-5091011686.B