Outfront Media LLC v. Board of Assessors of Boston, 493 Mass. 811

The MBTA owns numerous outdoor advertising signs, which generate revenue for transit operations.
Outfront Media LLC contracted with the MBTA for the exclusive right to advertise on 128 signs and install telecommunications equipment, sharing revenue with the MBTA but keeping all profits above a guaranteed amount.
Outfront bore most costs, including installation, maintenance, utilities, and taxes related to its use of the signs.
The City of Boston assessed nearly $200,000 in real estate taxes against Outfront for fiscal year 2021 on the MBTA signs; Outfront sought abatement, arguing for exemption under G.L. c. 161A, § 24.
The Appellate Tax Board upheld the tax assessment; Outfront appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Who bears the burden of proving taxability/exemption?	City must prove Outfront's use is taxable.	Outfront must prove its entitlement to exemption.	Outfront has burden; exemptions strictly construed.
Whether Outfront's use is "+used in connection with a business for profit+" under § 24	Its actions are like services, not for-profit use.	Outfront conducts profit-driven business.	Outfront's use is for-profit; exemption doesn't apply.
Scope of "use"—service provider vs. for-profit business distinction	"Use" requires more possessory interest/lease only	Revenue-control distinguishes true use.	Significant control and revenue-control means "use."
Whether taxing Outfront interferes with MBTA's essential government function	Tax reduces MBTA income, impairing function.	Legislature intended this limited taxation.	Tax does not unlawfully interfere with MBTA's function.

Reagan v. Commissioner of Revenue, 491 Mass. 446 (sets out standard of strict construction for tax exemptions)
Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette Inc. v. Assessors of Attleboro, 476 Mass. 690 (burden of proof for tax exemptions)
New England Legal Found. v. Boston, 423 Mass. 602 (interpretation of property tax exemption statutes)
South Boston Sav. Bank v. Commissioner of Revenue, 418 Mass. 695 (strict construction of tax exemptions)
Middlesex Retirement Sys., LLC v. Assessors of Billerica, 453 Mass. 495 (role of deference to tax board interpretations)
Beacon S. Station Assocs. v. Assessors of Boston, 85 Mass. App. Ct. 301 (effect of amendments narrowing tax exemption for MBTA property)
Boston v. Massachusetts Port Auth., 364 Mass. 639 (statutory interpretation regarding government functions and exemptions)
Gaertner v. Donnelly, 296 Mass. 260 (common-law meaning of "use and occupancy" distinguished)