861 N.W.2d 718
Neb.2015Background
- Cargill timely filed its 2010 personal property tax return listing substantial tangible personal property; the assessor accepted the return but the property was not placed on the 2010 tax rolls and no tax was assessed or paid.
- In October 2013, the Colfax County Board of Equalization sent Cargill a letter stating it was placing the 2010 personal property "back on the tax rolls," citing Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-1507(1) and asserting a clerical error or lack of an exemption.
- Cargill protested; the Board denied the protest and Cargill appealed to the Tax Equalization and Review Commission (TERC), which issued a show-cause hearing on jurisdiction.
- TERC excluded a Department of Revenue order offered by the Board (not exchanged timely) and concluded § 77-1507(1) applies only to real property, not personal property, and that the Board lacked statutory authority to add the omitted personal property to the 2010 rolls.
- Because the Board’s action was void for lack of statutory authority, TERC held it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 77-1507(1) authorized the Board to add omitted 2010 personal property to the tax rolls | Cargill: § 77-1507(1) does not authorize adding personal property; Board lacked authority (implicit) | Board: § 77-1507(1) authorizes correction of clerical errors and omitted property, applying to personal as well as real property | Held: § 77-1507(1) applies only to real property; it did not authorize adding Cargill’s personal property, so the Board’s action was void |
| Whether the Board could rely on clerical-error authority in § 77-1507(1) to adjust personal property | Cargill: clerical-error correction under § 77-1507(1) limited to real property; personal property governed elsewhere | Board: the statute’s reference to clerical errors is general and thus includes personal property | Held: statute’s language, context, and regulations show clerical-error correction under § 77-1507(1) is for real property only |
| Whether TERC properly excluded the Department of Revenue order offered by the Board | Cargill: exclusion appropriate due to procedural rules and late exchange | Board: the order was relevant and should have been received as evidence | Held: TERC did not err in excluding the exhibit (procedural noncompliance); Court need not decide further because Board lacked statutory authority |
| Whether TERC had jurisdiction over the appeal given the Board’s action | Cargill: TERC lacks jurisdiction if the Board’s action is void for lack of statutory authority | Board: TERC has jurisdiction to review Board actions | Held: Because the Board’s action was void (no statutory authority), TERC lacked jurisdiction; Court affirmed TERC’s conclusion |
Key Cases Cited
- Conroy v. Keith Cty. Bd. of Equal., 288 Neb. 196 (2014) (standard of appellate review of TERC decisions)
- First Nat. Bank of Omaha v. Davey, 285 Neb. 835 (2013) (statutory interpretation is a question of law)
- Darnall Ranch v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 280 Neb. 655 (2010) (TERC lacks jurisdiction where county board actions are void)
- John Day Co. v. Douglas Cty. Bd. of Equal., 243 Neb. 24 (1993) (county board powers are strictly statutory and construed narrowly)