Can a Maryland Property Tax Assessment Appeal Board raise your property's assessed value on its own, without anyone asking it to?

Plain-English summary

The Administrator of Maryland's Property Tax Assessment Appeal Boards (PTAABs) asked the Attorney General two related questions: could a PTAAB raise a property's assessed value above what the local supervisor of assessments had proposed, and if so, could it do that on its own initiative rather than because someone asked it to? PTAABs were the second tier of Maryland's three-step property tax assessment review process, sitting between the initial supervisor of assessments and the Maryland Tax Court.

The Attorney General concluded that a PTAAB does have the power to increase an assessment beyond what the supervisor proposed, since the statute governing appeals to a PTAAB let taxpayers, counties, cities, the Attorney General, and the State Department of Assessments and Taxation all appeal for a higher assessment, not just a lower one, and a related provision governing appeals to the Tax Court clearly assumed PTAABs could increase assessments. But the opinion drew a sharp line at the second question: unlike its predecessor bodies, which had express statutory authority before 1973 to open assessment reviews on their own motion, the modern PTAAB had no such power. The 1973 law that created the PTAABs repealed that authority, and current law let a PTAAB act only in response to a "demand" from a proper party, meaning a PTAAB could not raise anyone's tax bill unless someone with standing had actually asked it to.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1985. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Could a Maryland Property Tax Assessment Appeal Board increase someone's property tax assessment above what the supervisor of assessments had proposed?
Yes, according to this opinion, but only if a proper party appealed and asked for the higher assessment. Article 81, §255(b)(1) let taxpayers, counties, cities, the Attorney General, or the Department of Assessments and Taxation appeal for a higher as well as a lower assessment, and the opinion found the General Assembly clearly intended the PTAAB to be able to grant that kind of request.

Could a PTAAB just decide on its own to raise a property's assessment, without anyone filing an appeal?
No. The opinion concluded that the PTAABs' predecessor bodies had that "own motion" power under a 1959 law, but the 1973 law that created the modern PTAABs repealed it, and current law authorized PTAAB hearings only on the "demand" of a proper party, not on the board's own initiative.

Why did it matter whether a PTAAB could raise an assessment on its own motion versus only on request?
The opinion explained that PTAABs were structured as adjudicatory appeal boards subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, not general fact-finding bodies like the Department of Assessments and Taxation or the Tax Court, and that if a PTAAB raised an assessment on its own with no requesting party, there would be no one positioned to defend that higher assessment if the taxpayer appealed it further to the Tax Court.

Background and statutory framework

The PTAABs were created as independent state agencies by Chapter 784, Laws of Maryland 1973, replacing the county Appeal Tax Courts or County Commissioners as the second tier of Maryland's three-tiered property tax assessment review system: a taxpayer first protested to the supervisor of assessments under Article 81, §255(a), then could appeal to the local PTAAB under §250, and finally to the Maryland Tax Court under §256(a). The opinion found the PTAABs' power to increase assessments confirmed by the broad right to appeal for a higher assessment in §255(b)(1), by the Tax Court appeal provisions in §256(a), by the supervisors' own right to appeal PTAAB rulings they considered improper under §234, and by the Court of Appeals' recognition in Montgomery County Board of Realtors v. Montgomery County, 287 Md. 101, 109 (1980), that the administrative review process specifically included a county's ability to seek review of what it regarded as an inadequate assessment.

On the "own motion" question, the opinion traced how a 1959 amendment, Chapter 757, Laws of Maryland 1959, had expressly let the County Commissioners or Appeal Tax Courts open assessment hearings on their own motion, a power the Court of Appeals had recognized in County Comm'rs of Anne Arundel County v. Buck, 190 Md. 394, 401 (1948), but that this provision was repealed by the same 1973 law that created the PTAABs, leaving PTAAB hearings dependent on a "demand" from a proper party under §255(b) and Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Comm'n v. Washington National Arena, 282 Md. 588, 608 (1978). The opinion also drew on the distinction between the supervisors of assessments and Tax Court, which had express ex parte increase authority under §29(d) and §229(h) and were exempt from the State Administrative Procedure Act's adjudicatory hearing provisions, and the PTAABs, which were generally subject to those provisions and functioned in a quasi-judicial role without standing to defend their own decisions on further appeal, as described in Maryland Port Administration v. C. J. Langenfelder & Son, Inc., 50 Md. App. 525, 533 (1982), and Holy Cross Hospital of Silver Spring v. Health Services Cost Review Comm'n, 283 Md. 677, 683 (1983) (an agency's authority does not extend beyond its statutory warrant). The opinion noted that a pending Court of Appeals case, MPTH Associates v. State Department of Assessments & Taxation, 302 Md. 319, 321 n. 1 (1985), had involved a PTAAB increasing an assessment apparently on its own motion, but the parties had not raised the question, so the Court never addressed it.

Citations

Statutes:

• Article 81, §255(a) of the Maryland Code (initial protest to supervisor of assessments)
• Article 81, §250 of the Maryland Code (PTAAB jurisdiction over county/city property tax appeals)
• Article 81, §256(a) of the Maryland Code (appeal from PTAAB to the Maryland Tax Court)
• Article 81, §255(b)(1) of the Maryland Code (right of taxpayers, counties, cities, Attorney General, Department to appeal for higher or lower assessment)
• Article 81, §234 of the Maryland Code (supervisors' right to appeal PTAAB rulings)
• Article 81, §234A(a) of the Maryland Code (assessors must consider PTAAB-adjusted valuations)
• Article 81, §232(8)(a) of the Maryland Code (Director-ordered review upon request of the final assessing authority)
• Article 81, §29(d) of the Maryland Code (supervisor's ex parte power to increase valuation)
• Article 81, §229(h) of the Maryland Code (Tax Court's power to assess or classify anew)
• Chapter 784, Laws of Maryland 1973 (created the PTAABs and repealed own-motion hearing authority)
• Chapter 757, Laws of Maryland 1959 (former own-motion hearing authority of County Commissioners/Appeal Tax Courts)

Cases:

• MPTH Associates v. State Department of Assessments & Taxation, 302 Md. 319 (1985)
• County Comm'rs of Anne Arundel County v. Buck, 190 Md. 394, 399 (1948)
• Montgomery County Board of Realtors v. Montgomery County, 287 Md. 101 (1980)
• Maryland-National Capital Park Planning Comm'n v. Washington National Arena, 282 Md. 588, 597 (1978)
• County Executive for Montgomery County v. Supervisor of Assessments, 275 Md. 392, 394 n. 3 (1975)
• Holy Cross Hospital of Silver Spring v. Health Services Cost Review Comm'n, 283 Md. 677, 683 (1983)
• Maryland Port Administration v. C. J. Langenfelder & Son, Inc., 50 Md. App. 525, 533 (1982)

Source

• Landing page: https://oag.maryland.gov/resources-info/Pages/attorney-general%E2%80%99s-opinions.aspx
• Original PDF: https://oag.maryland.gov/resources-info/Documents/pdfs/Opinions/1985/Volume70_1985.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain, the linked PDF is authoritative.

ASSESSMENTS AND TAXATION

Property Tax Assessment Appeal Boards—Appeal Procedures—A PTAAB may Increase Proposed Assessment, but only on Request of a Proper Party and not on its own Motion.

May 14, 1985

Mr. Craig C. Biggs, Administrator
Property Tax Assessment Appeal Boards

You have requested our opinion on the scope of powers of a Property Tax Assessment Appeal Board (a "PTAAB") in reviewing decisions of supervisors of assessments. Specifically, you ask the following questions:

1. Does a PTAAB have the power to increase a property assessment beyond that proposed by the supervisor of assessments?

2. If a PTAAB does have that power, may it order such an increase on its own motion?

For the reasons given below, we have concluded that a PTAAB has the power to increase assessments beyond that proposed by the supervisor of assessments, but only on the request of a proper party before it. A PTAAB may not make such increases on its own motion.1

I
Background

The Property Tax Assessment Appeals Boards were created by Chapter 784, Laws of Maryland 1973, as independent State agencies. The PTAABs succeeded the Appeal Tax Courts or County Commissioners of the various counties as the second tier of Maryland's three-tiered system for administrative review of property tax assessments.2

Under the current system, a party aggrieved by a proposed assessment must first protest and demand a hearing before the supervisor of assessments. Article 81, §255(a). Thereafter, the local PTAAB "has jurisdiction over all appeals... concerning property tax assessments" within the county (or Baltimore City) where it sits. Article 81, §250. A third administrative appeal may be taken from the PTAAB to the Maryland Tax Court. Article 81, §256(a). Each of these reviews is de novo. Article 81, §§255(c) and 229(e).3

II
PTAABs' Power to Increase Assessments
A. Existence of the Power

Article 81, §255(b)(1) authorizes any "county, or city, or the Attorney General[, or] the State Department of Assessments and Taxation", as well as any taxpayer, to appeal to the local PTAAB from a decision of a supervisor of assessments "as to the assessment of any property or any unit of tax value, or as to the increase, reduction or abatement of, or refusal to increase, reduce or abate, any such assessment". In our view, this broad grant to governmental entities of a right to appeal clearly indicates the General Assembly's intent to permit the PTAABs to hear and rule on both (i) a taxpayer's request for a lower assessment than that proposed by the supervisor of assessments and (ii) a government's request for a higher assessment than that proposed by the local supervisor of assessments. Indeed, under §255(b)(1), a taxpayer even has the right to seek a higher assessment of another taxpayer's property. Cf. County Comm'rs of Anne Arundel County v. Buck, 190 Md. 394, 399 (1948) (under former law, taxpayer had legal right to complain of underassessment of another's property).

Article 81, §256(a) reflects the General Assembly's intent to empower the PTAABs to increase, as well as decrease, assessments. That section grants taxpayers, supervisors of assessments, and State and local governments the right to appeal to the Tax Court from "any assessment or classification, or [from] any increase, reduction, abatement, modification, change or alteration or failure or refusal to increase, reduce, abate, modify or change any assessment, or [from] any classification or change in classification, or refusal or failure to make a change, by any property tax assessment appeal board under §255 of this article". In thus enumerating the actions of a PTAAB from which an appeal will lie to the Tax Court, §256(a) clearly recognizes the power of a PTAAB to take any of these enumerated actions, including its power to "increase" assessments beyond that proposed by the supervisor of assessments.

Article 81, §§234 and 234A similarly reflect a PTAAB's power to increase assessments. Section 234 authorizes supervisors of assessments "to appeal to the Maryland Tax Court from any assessments or rulings which the supervisors consider improper when made by the property tax assessment appeal board in the counties or in Baltimore City". And, under §234A(a), assessors must "give due consideration to the reasons for the valuation determined" whenever "any assessment [was] adjusted by a property tax assessment appeal board" in the preceding year. These provisions neither expressly nor impliedly limit the PTAABs to "adjusting" assessments by way of reduction alone.

Moreover, the Court of Appeals has implicitly recognized the power of a PTAAB to increase assessments beyond that proposed by the supervisor of assessments. In Montgomery County Board of Realtors v. Montgomery County, 287 Md. 101 (1980), the Court invalidated a county statute that imposed, at the time of sale of real property, a tax on the amount by which the property's "taxable value", determined from its sale price, exceeded its assessed valuation. 287 Md. at 103. The Court noted that the statute had apparently been enacted in response to "what [the county] regarded as inadequate real property assessments". 287 Md. at 102. In striking down the county's local solution to that perceived problem, the Court expressly pointed out that "Montgomery County is not without remedies in any situation in which it believes the supervisor of assessments has undervalued any given property for tax purposes", because the statutory provisions that permit aggrieved parties to seek administrative review of assessments "specifically includ[e] a county". 287 Md. at 109.

In thus noting that the statutory review process specifically envisions the possibility that administrative review might result in increasing a supervisor's assessment, the Court expressly dealt only with reviews by supervisors and the Tax Court. Nonetheless, it is clear that the PTAABs, the intermediate review body, must have the same power in this regard as the other two bodies, if they are to carry out the General Assembly's intent "to afford the taxpaying public a systematic and efficient method of fact-finding and policy-formation" in real property taxation. Maryland-National Capital Park Planning Comm'n v. Washington National Arena, 282 Md. 588, 597 (1978).

B. Scope of the Power

However, a PTAAB's power to increase or decrease assessments upon petition of an aggrieved party does not, in our view, encompass the additional power to make such changes on its own motion. To be sure, the predecessors of the PTAABs did have statutory authority to initiate assessment hearings for any property within their jurisdiction. The County Commissioners or Appeal Tax Courts were expressly given that power in 1959, by an amendment to Article 81, §255 that provided:

"At any time before the said date of finality, the County Commissioners or the Appeal Tax Court of any county, as the case may be, may on their own motion hold a hearing and review any assessment on property assessed locally, to the same extent and in the same manner as if said hearing were demanded by a taxpayer, city, the Attorney General or Department, as hereinabove set out; and to that end may employ such technical advice and assistance as they may deem necessary or advisable under the circumstances." Chapter 757, Laws of Maryland 1959 (emphasis added).

That provision, however, was repealed by the same law that also created the PTAABs, Chapter 784, Laws of Maryland 1973. Today, the PTAABs are authorized to hold hearings only upon a "demand" of a proper party. Article 81, §255(b). See also Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Comm'n v. Washington National Arena, 282 Md. 588, 608 (1978) (determination of supervisor of assessments becomes final and binding if taxpayer waives or fails to assert right to appeal).

Similarly, the precursor of Article 81, §234 gave County Commissioners or Appeal Tax Courts, when reviewing the reports of supervisors of assessments, "the power to obtain additional data, and in case the assessment so determined upon is not satisfactory, [to] order a new valuation". Former Article 81, §168 (as enacted by Chapter 226, Laws of Maryland 1929). On that basis, the Court of Appeals held in 1948 that "it is clear that upon a proper showing the commissioners have the power and duty to 'order a new valuation' at any time before the date of finality, wholly apart from the continuous assessment plan". County Comm'rs of Anne Arundel County v. Buck, 190 Md. 394, 401 (1948).

Under current law, however, "the Director [of Assessments and Taxation] shall order and enforce a review of any properties upon receipt of a request to do so from the final assessing authority for the county or city in which the properties are located". Article 81, §232(8)(a). The "final assessing authority" for a county is the local PTAAB. County Executive for Montgomery County v. Supervisor of Assessments, 275 Md. 392, 394 n. 3 (1975). See also Chapter 577, Laws of Maryland 1978 ("for the purpose of specifying that... the Supervisors of Assessments and the Property Tax Assessment Appeal Boards are respectively the initial and the final assessing authorities"). Thus, if a PTAAB is not satisfied that certain property has been "valued at its full cash value on the date of finality", as required by Article 81, §14(b)(1)(i), or if it needs additional information to determine the matter, the PTAAB may require the Director of Assessments and Taxation to review the assessment. However, the present statute makes no provision for a PTAAB to "order a new valuation", that is, to itself increase a property assessment, on its own initiative.

Both the supervisors of assessments and the Maryland Tax Court, in contrast, have express statutory authority to make such increases. Thus, at the initial assessment level, a supervisor of assessments may "make or increase the valuation or change the classification [of property] ex parte" if, after notice of the proposed increase, the taxpayer does not appear before the supervisor to protest. Article 81, §29(d). And, at the final level of administrative review, the Tax Court "is empowered to assess anew [or] classify anew" any property, as well as to modify decisions made below. Article 81, §229(h).

Significantly, in our view, Article 81 contains no similar grant of power to the PTAABs. Instead, §255 refers only to appeals brought before a PTAAB by others, thereby clearly leaving the decision whether to challenge a supervisor's assessment to the sole discretion of the parties enumerated in §255(b)(1). Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission v. Washington National Arena, 282 Md. at 608. The references in §256(a) to a PTAAB's increasing or refusing to increase an assessment follow of necessity from §255, that is, they refer to a party's right to appeal from a PTAAB action that had been taken by the PTAAB at the prior request of an aggrieved party.

For a PTAAB to order an increase in an assessment in the absence of such a request would, in our view, be inconsistent with the apparent legislative intent in delineating the PTAABs' role in the assessment process. Notably, neither the Department of Assessments and Taxation nor the Tax Court is subject to the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (the "APA") governing adjudicatory hearings. State Government ("SG") Article, §10-202(a)(ii) and (viii). The PTAABs, in contrast, are generally subject to those provisions, subject only to any specific, overriding provisions of Article 81. See SG §§10-201(b)(1) and 10-202(a) (APA applies to every State officer or unit authorized to adjudicate contested cases, except those expressly exempted). Thus, the General Assembly has clearly distinguished between the "non-APA" bodies, to which it has given full power to make assessments, and the APA-governed PTAABs, to which it has assigned a more limited appellate function. Compare Article 81, §§229 and 232 with Article 81, §250. See also Holy Cross Hospital of Silver Spring v. Health Services Cost Review Comm'n, 283 Md. 677, 683 (1983) (since an administrative agency is a creature of statute, its authority does not reach beyond the statutory warrant).

Moreover, a PTAAB's attempt to act beyond its assigned appellate function could create a difficulty for which no provision has been made. When it hears an appeal from a supervisor's assessment, a PTAAB exercises a quasi-judicial function. Accordingly, "it is not a party to the proceeding before it or before an appellate body authorized to review its decision". Maryland Port Administration v. C. J. Langenfelder & Son, Inc., 50 Md. App. 525, 533 (1982). That is, the PTAAB has no right to appear before the Tax Court to defend its decision. Thus, if a PTAAB increased an assessment on its own motion, there might well be no one to defend that position before the Tax Court.

For example, a taxpayer whose property has been assessed at $100,000 might appeal to the local PTAAB, arguing that the property's true assessed value is only $50,000. The supervisor of assessments would present the evidence supporting his or her $100,000 assessment, as required by Article 81, §247. If no other parties appear, but the PTAAB unilaterally increases the assessment to $125,000, the taxpayer would almost certainly appeal to the Tax Court. Yet, on appeal, it would be highly unlikely that the supervisor of assessments would be in a position to argue in favor of the PTAAB's $125,000 evaluation, an assessment significantly higher than that supported by the assessor's own evidence and expert opinion. And nowhere has the General Assembly made any provision for a PTAAB to appear before the Tax Court to present evidence in support of its own valuation of the property.

What the General Assembly has provided, however, is the right of the local government to appear before the PTAABs and assert the alleged underassessment of property by the supervisor of assessments. If the evidence presented by the local government is persuasive to a majority of the PTAAB, then the PTAAB has clear statutory authority to increase the assessment. In establishing this system, the General Assembly retained in the hands of the local government (but not in the PTAABs) the former power of the County Commissioners or their appointed Appeal Tax Courts "to obtain additional data" concerning the proper valuation of property. Thus, it is the local government, which is in the best position to know the local situation, that is expected to advance local interests before the PTAAB. The PTAABs themselves, however, were cast as "primarily adjudicatory" appeal boards. Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Washington National Arena, 282 Md. at 603. Hence, the PTAABs should act only on the basis of evidence presented by proper parties to their proceedings.

III
Conclusion

In summary, it is our opinion that a Property Tax Assessment Appeal Board has the power to increase an assessment beyond that proposed by a supervisor of assessments, but only on the request of a proper party before it. A Property Tax Assessment Appeal Board may not make such increases on its own motion.

Stephen H. Sachs, Attorney General
James W. Himes, Assistant Attorney General
C. J. Messerschmidt, Staff Attorney

Avery Aisenstark
Chief Counsel
Opinions and Advice

1 In MPTH Associates v. State Department of Assessments & Taxation, 302 Md. 319 (1985), the Court of Appeals had before it a case in which a PTAAB had increased a supervisor's assessment, apparently on its own motion. However, the parties to that action did not question, and, accordingly, the Court did not address, the validity of the PTAAB's action. 302 Md. at 321 n. 1.

2 Under the former system, the County Commissioners of each county were authorized to create an Appeal Tax Court for the county, with exclusive jurisdiction to hear appeals from the county's supervisor of assessments. If they did not create such a body, the Commissioners themselves heard those appeals. Former Article 81, §§186, 186A, and 186B (as enacted by Chapter 717, Laws of Maryland 1943).

3 Chapter 8, Laws of Maryland 1985, effective February 1, 1986, has recodified these and related statutory provisions, without substantive change, as part of the new Tax-Property Article ("TP" Article) of the Maryland Code. See generally TP Title 3, governing the establishment and basic jurisdiction of PTAABs, and TP Title 14, Subtitle 5, governing appeal procedures.