Showing posts with label Over-assessment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Over-assessment. Show all posts

Thursday, July 31, 2025

How to Appeal Your Home Assessment: A Step-by-Step Guide with the Comparable Sales Approach

Are you confused about your recent property tax assessment? Many homeowners feel that their assessed value doesn't accurately reflect the current market conditions. While tax assessments are meant to be precise, they often rely on mass appraisals and algorithms that can overlook the nuances of individual properties and the latest market changes. If you believe your assessment is too high, don't worry! You have the right to appeal it. One of the most effective strategies for doing this is the comparable sales approach. This method involves examining recent sales of properties similar to yours to establish a more accurate fair market value.

In this blog post, we will guide you through a simple process to challenge your home's assessed value using the comparable sales approach. We will analyze recent sales data from the County Assessor's records and demonstrate how to select suitable comparable properties (“comps”), adjust their sale prices, and estimate a fair market value for your home. Follow our example using a subject property located in a Planned Unit Development (PUD), valued as of January 1, 2025, to learn how to build a strong case for your appeal.

Description of the Subject Property

The subject property is a 19-year-old single-family home situated within a desirable PUD. This community offers residents access to extensive amenities, including a golf course. The property itself features a land area of 7,405 square feet and a comfortable living area of 1,647 square feet. Notably, it does not include a golf course lot or a private swimming pool, making it comparable to properties without these specific high-value features.

(Click on the image to enlarge)

The Steps

Compiling the Comps List: Although there are 35 assessor-identified qualified (i.e., arms-length sales) property sales within the PUD during 2024, we've excluded 10 sales from our analysis because they are situated on golf course lots or properties with swimming pools, which do not apply to our subject.

Valuation Method: To determine a fair market value, we'll use a straightforward comparable sales ("comp sales") approach.

Comps Selection: Out of the available 25 comps, the five most comparable properties ("final five") will be selected. The selection criteria are as follows:

1.   Living Area Proximity: Living areas must be within 15% of the subject's living area of 1,647 square feet.

o   15% of 1,647 sq ft is 0.15×1647=247.05 sq ft.

o   Minimum acceptable living area: 1647247.05=1399.95 sq ft.

o   Maximum acceptable living area: 1647+247.05=1894.05 sq ft.

o   Therefore, the living area range for comps is approximately 1,400 sq ft to 1,894 sq ft.

2.   Proximity to Valuation Date: If more than five comps meet the living area criteria, we will prioritize the five properties with sale dates closest to January 1, 2025, to minimize the need for time adjustments.

Adjustments to Comps: Once we select these final five, we'll adjust their sale prices based on size and price. For example, the sale prices of properties with living areas smaller than 1,647 square feet will be adjusted upward by multiplying the size difference by the average sale price per living square foot (SP/LA) of $161. Conversely, for properties larger than 1,647 square feet, their sale prices will be adjusted downward based on the size difference multiplied by the SP/LA of $161.

Value Conclusion: The final step will be to determine the subject property's value by averaging the adjusted sale prices of the final five.

Rationale: Additionally, we'll provide a detailed explanation of the rationale for selecting the final five that contribute to the valuation of the subject.

Step 1: Identifying Potential Comps Based on Living Area

Let's examine the data and filter for properties with living areas between 1,400 sq ft and 1,894 sq ft:

Step 2: Selecting the Five Comps Closest to the Valuation Date

We have more than five properties that meet the living area criteria. Now, we will select the final five with sale dates closest to January 1, 2025.

The sales closest to the valuation date of January 1, 2025 (i.e., later in 2024), are:

1.   COMP-25: Sale Date: 12/01/24 (Living Area: 1,869 sq ft)

2.   COMP-22: Sale Date: 11/01/24 (Living Area: 1,647 sq ft)

3.   COMP-21: Sale Date: 10/01/24 (Living Area: 1,869 sq ft)

4.   COMP-20: Sale Date: 10/01/24 (Living Area: 1,647 sq ft)

5.   COMP-18: Sale Date: 09/01/24 (Living Area: 1,470 sq ft)

These five comparable sales will be used as our final five.

Rationale for Comparable Selection

The selection of these final five (comparable properties) is based on two key principles crucial for accurate property valuation:

1.   Similarity in Key Attributes: The primary filter of living area within 15% of the subject ensures that the chosen comparables are fundamentally similar in size, a significant driver of property value. This selection minimizes the need for drastic adjustments. While other factors like land area and building age are considered in a full appraisal, focusing on living area first provides a strong initial set of comps. The data used indicates that most of the chosen comps also have similar land areas and building ages, further reinforcing their comparability.

2.   Recency of Sale: By prioritizing the most recent sales (those closest to the January 1, 2025, valuation date), we minimize the impact of market fluctuations over time, reducing or eliminating the need for complex time adjustments, which can introduce subjectivity and potential inaccuracies into the valuation process. In a dynamic real estate market, recent sales data provides the most relevant snapshot of current market value.

3.   Exclusion of Non-Comparable Features: The comps list already excludes properties with golf course lots or swimming pools, ensuring the selected comps align with the subject’s characteristics within the PUD.

4. Age Consideration: The selected properties have ages (15–19 years) close to the subject’s 19 years, minimizing the need for age-related adjustments.

Adjustment Formula: Difference in Living Area × SP/LA of $161

Value Conclusion:

To determine the subject property's value, we average the adjusted sale prices of the five comparable properties:

Average Adjusted Sale Price = (249,158+249,400+262,858+275,000+228,497)/5

Average Adjusted Sale Price = 252,983

Based on this comparable sales analysis, the estimated fair market value for the subject property as of January 1, 2025, is approximately $253,000.

This analysis provides a clear and justifiable method for estimating the subject's value, which can be a strong basis for appealing a high assessment.

Scatter Plot


Scatter Plot: The plot shows sale price vs. living area for all 25 comparable properties. The final five comps (COMP-18, COMP-20, COMP-21, COMP-22, COMP-25), used for the subject property’s valuation, are highlighted in orange, while the other 20 comps are in blue.

Trendline: The blue trendline illustrates the positive relationship between Living Area and Sale Price.

Graph Integration: Including this scatter plot in the analysis section helps visually justify the selection of the final five comps, which have living areas close to the subject’s 1,647 sq ft.

Conclusion

Appealing your home assessment might seem daunting, but by diligently applying the comparable sales approach, you can arm yourself with solid evidence to support your case. We've explored how to identify relevant sales data, select the most comparable properties based on key features and sale recency, and make necessary adjustments to arrive at a well-supported estimate of your property's fair market value. Remember, a thorough and well-documented analysis is key to a successful appeal. By taking the time to understand and utilize the comparable sales method, you can confidently advocate for a more accurate assessment and potentially achieve significant savings on your property taxes.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this blog post is for general informational and educational purposes only, and does not constitute professional legal, real estate, or tax advice. While we aim to provide accurate and helpful content, property assessment appeals can be complex and are subject to specific local laws, regulations, and individual circumstances. The methods and examples discussed herein are for illustrative purposes only and may not apply to every situation.

It is highly recommended that you consult with a qualified real estate professional, appraiser, attorney, or tax advisor regarding your specific property and any assessment appeal matters. Relying solely on the information presented here may not be sufficient for a successful appeal. We do not assume any liability for decisions made based on the content of this blog post. Always verify information with official sources and seek professional guidance when necessary.

Upcoming Book on Property Tax Assessment Appeals

My forthcoming book will provide an in-depth exploration of how to successfully challenge over-assessed property valuations. Packed with practical examples, the book will cover a wide range of property types, including those in Homeowners Associations (HOAs), non-HOA communities, beachfront properties, and more. For tax professionals and mass filers, I’ll include, among others, time-adjusted comps analysis and advanced regression-based solutions that offer statistically robust methods for crafting compelling appeals. Whether you’re a homeowner or a professional, this book will equip you with the tools and strategies needed to navigate the appeal process with confidence. Stay tuned for its release!


Wednesday, January 10, 2024

Next-Generation Advocacy: Property Tax Consultants, ChatGPT, and Bard on Challenging Assessment Ratios

Property Tax Consultants can challenge an assessment ratio in cases where an assessment roll is suspected of being over-assessed. Rather than filing individual appeals for each homeowner, which can be time-consuming and costly, they can represent all homeowners in a district, town, or county. This approach eliminates the need for multiple appeals and ensures all homeowners are represented.

Over-assessment can occur when a county's automated valuation model (AVM) fails to accurately assess values in certain areas or segments of the value curve. Standard statistical tests can help identify these over-assessments, which can pave the way for a potentially successful ratio challenge.

Sid: I plan to challenge the Just Value of over-assessed taxing districts in the county. To do that, I have created the Just Value Ratio. This ratio is calculated by dividing the county's just value on the tax roll by my regression-based challenger model values. I developed the model using the county's Just value as the dependent variable and several property characteristics variables that were statistically significant.

All taxing districts must be valued at or near the countywide ratio of 90. However, before I can challenge specific district ratios, I need to fully understand how the major districts in the county have performed relative to the countywide ratio statistics.

Please study the table below and provide a detailed explanation of these stats, helping me identify the districts where the county's model has not performed efficiently, thus offering an opportunity for a ratio challenge.



ChatGPT: To start, let's break down the information in the table provided:

1.    Taxing District: This column lists the different taxing districts in the county.

2.    Parcel Count: This column indicates the number of parcels (properties) in each taxing district.

3.    Just Value Ratio: This ratio is calculated by dividing the county's just value on the tax roll by the regression-based challenger model values developed by Sid.

Based on the information provided, the districts with potential opportunities for over-assessment challenges, which can potentially lead to assessment reductions and tax savings, are:

District 2:

  • Just Value Ratio: 97
  • Analysis: The just value ratio for District 2 is higher than the countywide ratio of 90, indicating potential overassessment. This suggests that properties in this district may have been assessed at a higher value than what the county's model predicted. Challenging the ratio in this district may result in assessment reductions and potential tax savings for property owners.

District 6:

  • Just Value Ratio: 99
  • Analysis: The just value ratio for District 6 is significantly above the countywide ratio of 90, indicating potential overassessment. Challenging the ratio in this district may lead to assessment reductions and significant tax savings for property owners.

District 4:

  • Just Value Ratio: 92
  • Analysis: The just value ratio for District 4 is slightly above the countywide ratio of 90, suggesting marginal overassessment. Challenging the ratio in this district may result in minor assessment reductions and marginal tax savings for property owners.

UNINCORP:

  • Just Value Ratio: 92
  • Analysis: The just value ratio for the UNINCORP district is slightly above the countywide ratio of 90, indicating marginal overassessment. Challenging the ratio in this district may lead to minor assessment reductions and marginal tax savings for property owners.

Please note that this analysis is based on the provided information and it is advisable to consult with a tax professional or relevant authorities for accurate and up-to-date assessments before pursuing any challenges.

Bard: Sure, I've been focusing on improving my expertise in solving ratio analysis problems. Here's how the ratios compare to the countywide ratio of 90:

Districts with potentially overvalued ratios:

  • District 2: 107.78% overvalued - This district remains the strongest candidate for a ratio challenge due to its significant overvaluation compared to the countywide ratio.
  • District 6: 109.9% overvalued - Similar to District 2, this district also remains a prime candidate for challenging the overvalued ratio.
  • District 4: 102.22% overvalued - This district shows moderate overvaluation and could be a potential challenge depending on the specific property values and your risk tolerance.
  • Unincorporated: 102.22% overvalued - Similar to District 4, the unincorporated area shows moderate overvaluation and could be a potential challenge depending on your specific situation.

Districts with potentially undervalued ratios:

  • District 1: 81/90 * 100% = 90% - This district is actually undervalued by 10% compared to the countywide ratio. You might want to consider investigating why your model is undervaluing properties in this area and potentially adjust it accordingly.
  • District 3: 84/90 * 100% = 93.33% - This district shows a slight undervaluation of about 6.67% compared to the countywide ratio. While the undervaluation is smaller than District 1, it might still be worth investigating, especially if there are a significant number of properties affected.

Remember, this analysis is based on the ratios provided and doesn't take into account specific property details or your individual circumstances. Consulting with a qualified tax professional is crucial to determine the best course of action for your specific situation. They can help you understand the reasons behind the undervaluation or overvaluation in certain districts and advise you on whether challenging the assessment is worthwhile.

Note: All conversations here are unedited. E&OE. 

Note: ChatGPT is a registered trademark of OpenAI, while Bard is a registered trademark of Google. 

50% Off This Weekend Only – Five Practical Valuation Modeling Books

This weekend only, I’m running a straightforward 50% off campaign on the PDF editions of my five most recent valuation modeling books. The...