Appeal of City of Nashua
68 A.3d 288
N.H.2013Background
- Taxpayer Kennedy sought an elderly exemption for tax year 2011 with total assets $145,724.19 and a $42,000 equity loan secured by her residence.
- City denied the exemption because Kennedy's net assets exceeded the local limit of $125,000 excluding the residence.
- Kennedy appealed to the BTLA arguing net assets should be reduced by encumbrances on assets, including the equity loan, under RSA 72:39-a,1(c).
- BTLA granted the exemption to Kennedy, and the City appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court reviewed de novo the BTLA’s statutory interpretation and held the BTLA misinterpreted RSA 72:39-a,1(c).
- The Court reversed the BTLA decision, denying the elderly exemption for Kennedy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| What constitutes net assets under RSA 72:39-a,1(c)? | Kennedy argued net assets are assets minus encumbrances on those assets. | City argued encumbrances on the residence are not deducted since residence is excluded from assets. | Net assets = value of includable assets minus encumbrances; encumbrances on the residence are not deducted. |
| Should the legislature's language be read by plain meaning or consider broader fairness concerns? | Plain language supports deducting encumbrances; examples of unfair results do not control. | Plain meaning plus equity considerations may yield different results; not all debt factors are addressed. | Court relied on plain meaning of encumbrances and net assets; not extending beyond statutory language. |
Key Cases Cited
- Appeal of Wilson, 161 N.H. 659 (N.H. 2011) (statutory interpretation and standard of review for BTLA decisions)
- Pennelli v. Town of Pelham, 148 N.H. 365 (N.H. 2002) (plain meaning and legislative intent in tax statutes)