Can the Mississippi Department of Revenue or a county tax assessor set the 'true value' for property tax purposes higher than the property's appraised or market value?

Plain-English summary

State Senator Kathy Chism asked four overlapping questions about how Mississippi defines "true value" for property tax assessments, and whether the Department of Revenue (DOR) can equalize property values upward past their appraised or market value. AG Fitch answered the first question and declined the rest, treating them as factual or regulatory matters outside the AG's opinion jurisdiction under § 7-5-25.

The answered question: under § 27-35-50(1) of the Mississippi Code, "true value" is a broad statutory category that "shall mean and include, but shall not be limited to, market value, cash value, actual cash value, proper value and value for the purposes of appraisal for ad valorem taxation." That list is non-exhaustive. The legislature deliberately set "true value" wider than any one of those concepts, so true value can include considerations beyond pure market value or appraised value.

Subsections (2) through (5) of § 27-35-50 give the assessor authority to apply property-type-specific rules. Different property categories (residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial, personal property, motor vehicles) get different valuation approaches under those subsections. True value is therefore not a single fixed number derived mechanically; it depends on property type, use, and assessor judgment.

What the AG would not opine on:

1. Whether DOR can equalize true value above appraised or market value. The AG points to § 27-35-113(5)(c) as authorizing DOR to "adjust and equalize" property in certain "fact determinative" circumstances, but stops there. Whether any particular adjustment exceeds market value is a factual question the AG cannot answer in an opinion.
2. How Chapters 33 and 35 of Title 27 and current DOR guidelines ensure true value reflects fair market value without exceeding reasonable market values. Treated as a regulatory question because it requires interpretation of DOR guidelines, which the AG does not do in opinions.
3. Whether a home with a specific depreciation rate (such as 70%) under DOR guidelines may have a true value that exceeds depreciated appraised or market value. Same reason: requires interpretation of DOR guidelines and factual analysis of specific assessments.

The opinion attaches NRG Wholesale Generation LP v. Kerr, 258 So. 3d 278 (Miss. 2018), for informational purposes. NRG is the leading Mississippi Supreme Court decision interpreting true-value standards for industrial property under § 27-35-50.

What this means for you

For Mississippi homeowners who think their property tax assessment is too high: The one thing this opinion settles is the statutory definition: under § 27-35-50(1), "true value" is defined to "include, but shall not be limited to" market value, and § 27-35-50(2)-(5) make true-value determinations turn on property type, use, and assessor discretion. So "true value" is not simply "market value." The opinion does not decide whether any particular assessment is too high; it expressly declines to make factual determinations about specific assessments.

For county tax assessors: The opinion restates that true-value determinations are "conditioned upon property type and use as well as assessor discretion" under § 27-35-50(2)-(5), and that § 27-35-113(5)(c) authorizes the Department of Revenue to "adjust and equalize" property in certain fact-determinative circumstances. The opinion stops there; it does not pass on whether any specific equalization adjustment is proper.

For taxpayers and others researching the issue: The opinion attaches NRG Wholesale Generation LP v. Kerr, 258 So. 3d 278 (Miss. 2018), "for informational purposes" and recommends speaking with the Department of Revenue. The opinion does not summarize what NRG holds; it points to it as background.

For legislators considering property tax reform: The opinion answers only the definitional question and treats whether equalization may exceed appraised or market value as "outside the scope of an opinion" because it is fact-determinative or requires interpreting DOR guidelines. It does not recommend any statutory change.

Common questions

Q: What is "true value" in Mississippi property tax law?
A: A flexible statutory category under § 27-35-50(1). It "includes, but shall not be limited to" market value, cash value, actual cash value, proper value, and value for ad valorem appraisal. The legislature wrote it to capture more than just market value because some property categories (industrial plants, agricultural land in current use, mineral interests, business inventory) have value drivers that pure market comparables do not capture well.

Q: Why won't the AG just answer whether DOR can push true value above market value?
A: Section 7-5-25 limits AG opinions to prospective questions of state law for future guidance. The AG cannot opine on factual determinations or on regulatory interpretation. Whether DOR's equalization adjustments exceed market value in any given case depends on the facts of that case and on DOR's own guidelines. The AG points to its own prior practice in Barton (May 17, 2021) and Watson (Apr. 9, 2024) declining similar requests.

Q: What does DOR's equalization power under § 27-35-113(5)(c) actually do?
A: The opinion says § 27-35-113 addresses DOR's authority regarding recapitulations, and that § 27-35-113(5)(c) authorizes DOR to "adjust and equalize" property "in certain circumstances that are fact determinative." It does not spell out the standards that govern such adjustments, calling that part of the question outside the scope of an opinion.

Q: What is the NRG Wholesale Generation case the AG attached?
A: NRG Wholesale Generation LP v. Kerr, 258 So. 3d 278 (Miss. 2018), is a Mississippi Supreme Court decision the AG attached to the opinion "for informational purposes." The opinion does not describe its holding; it points to the case as background and recommends speaking with the Department of Revenue.

Q: Is there a meaningful difference between "appraised value" and "true value" under MS law?
A: Yes. "Appraised value" is the figure produced by an appraisal using one of the standard methods (cost, market, income approach). "True value" is the statutory category the tax law actually uses, defined to "include, but not be limited to" market value. The two often coincide for typical residential property, but they can diverge for property types where market-comparable evidence is thin or where the legislature has prescribed a special valuation method.

Q: What is the practical takeaway for taxpayers from this opinion?
A: Two points the opinion actually supports. First, "true value" under § 27-35-50 is defined more broadly than "market value," and the determination turns on property type, use, and assessor discretion. Second, the AG declined the questions about whether equalization may exceed appraised or market value, treating them as fact-determinative or as requiring interpretation of DOR guidelines, and recommended speaking with DOR.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion turns on a small set of provisions:

1. Statutory definition of value (§ 27-35-50(1)). "True value shall mean and include, but shall not be limited to, market value, cash value, actual cash value, proper value and value for the purposes of appraisal for ad valorem taxation."
2. Property-type-specific rules (§ 27-35-50(2)-(5)). The opinion notes that true-value determinations are "conditioned upon property type and use as well as assessor discretion" under these subsections.
3. DOR recapitulations and equalization (§ 27-35-113; § 27-35-113(5)(c)). The opinion states § 27-35-113 addresses DOR's authority regarding recapitulations and that subsection (5)(c) lets DOR "adjust and equalize" property in certain fact-determinative circumstances.

The opinion frames the AG's role as narrow: under § 7-5-25, the office issues opinions on prospective questions of state law only and cannot opine on determinations of fact or on regulations or guidelines (citing the Barton and Watson opinions). Senator Chism's second through fourth questions fell into those off-limits zones, so the AG answered the definitional question and declined the rest.

Citations and references

Statutes: Miss. Code Ann. § 27-35-50 (true value definition); § 27-35-50(1) (non-exhaustive list of components); § 27-35-50(2)-(5) (property-type-specific rules); § 27-35-113 (DOR recapitulation review); § 27-35-113(5)(c) (DOR adjust-and-equalize authority); § 27-35-115 (referenced in Senator Chism's question); § 7-5-25 (AG opinion scope).

Cases: NRG Wholesale Generation LP v. Kerr, 258 So. 3d 278 (Miss. 2018) (leading recent decision on true-value methodology, attached to opinion for informational purposes).

Prior AG opinions referenced: Barton (May 17, 2021); Watson (Apr. 9, 2024) (both relied on for the proposition that AG cannot opine on factual or regulatory questions).

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/K.-Chism-May-11-2026-True-Value-in-Property-Tax-Assessments.pdf

Original opinion text

May 11, 2026

The Honorable Kathy L. Chism
Senator, District 3
Post Office Box 1018
Jackson, Mississippi 39215-1018

Re: "True Value" in Property Tax Assessments

Dear Senator Chism:

The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.

Questions Presented

1. Under Mississippi Code Annotated Section 27-35-50 and related statutes, how is true value defined for property tax assessments, and can it exceed a property's appraised value (as determined by state board approved assessors using standard appraisal methods, e.g., cost, market, or income approaches) or market value (as established by comparable sales or market data)?

2. Does the Mississippi Department of Revenue ("MDOR") have the authority under Sections 27-35-113 and 27-35-115 to adjust the true value of properties through equalization to a level that exceeds their appraised or market value, and if so, what standards govern such adjustments?

3. How do Chapters 33 and 35 of Title 27 and current MDOR guidelines ensure that true value for homes reflects fair market value without exceeding reasonable appraised or market values?

4. May a home, reviewed by the tax assessor and delineated with a specific depreciation rate (e.g., 70%) under MDOR guidelines, garner a true value for ad valorem tax assessments that exceeds the depreciated appraised value or market value, and if so, what factors or methodologies permit this outcome?

Brief Response

1. Pursuant to Section 27-35-50(1), "[t]rue value shall mean and include, but shall not be limited to, market value, cash value, actual cash value, proper value and value for the purposes of appraisal for ad valorem taxation."

2. Section 27-35-113(5)(c) authorizes MDOR to "adjust and equalize" property in certain circumstances that are fact determinative. This question is outside the scope of an opinion as it is not addressed in state law and/or requires interpretation of MDOR guidelines.

3. This question is outside the scope of an opinion as it is not addressed in state law and/or requires interpretation of MDOR guidelines.

4. This question is outside the scope of an opinion as it is not addressed in state law and/or requires interpretation of MDOR guidelines.

Applicable Law and Discussion

We begin by noting that the office of the Attorney General may issue official opinions on prospective questions of state law only. Miss. Code Ann. § 7-5-25. We cannot opine upon determinations of fact, nor may we opine upon regulations or guidelines. MS AG Op., Barton at 1 n.2 (May 17, 2021); MS AG Op., Watson at 2 (Apr. 9, 2024).

You first ask how "true value" is defined under Section 27-35-50. Section 27-35-50(1) provides that "[t]rue value shall mean and include, but shall not be limited to, market value, cash value, actual cash value, proper value and value for the purposes of appraisal for ad valorem taxation." But ultimately, true value determinations are conditioned upon property type and use as well as assessor discretion. See Miss. Code Ann. § 27-35-50(2)-(5).

You also ask if MDOR has authority to adjust the true value of properties through equalization to a level that exceeds their appraised or market value; how state law and MDOR guidelines ensure that true value reflects fair market value without exceeding reasonable appraised or market values; and if a home may garner a true value that exceeds the depreciated appraised value or market value. Section 27-35-113 addresses MDOR's authority regarding recapitulations. Section 27-35-113(5)(c) authorizes MDOR to "adjust and equalize" property in certain circumstances that are fact determinative. Beyond this, your questions are outside the scope of an opinion as they are not addressed in state law and/or require interpretation of MDOR guidelines.

For informational purposes, we are attaching NRG Wholesale Generation LP v. Kerr, 258 So. 3d 278 (Miss. 2018). We also recommend speaking with MDOR regarding this matter.

If this office may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL

By: /s/ Maggie Kate Bobo
Maggie Kate Bobo
Special Assistant Attorney General