Blog - Page 52 of 105 - Finney Law Firm

’tis the season for Ohio property tax reduction (along with a free how-to video)

By Christopher P. FinneyJanuary 9, 2018August 5, 2022 1 Comment

Tax bills just hit the mailboxes of Hamilton County taxpayers this week, and our phone is ringing with questions about our Ohio property tax valuation reduction services.

Sample calls:

Many of the cases have merit, and we are aiding those taxpayers in getting their taxes reduced. Others, not so much. Here’s a sample call:

Client: “Hey, I just got my tax bill and my valuation just went up by 40%. Can I challenge it?”

Attorney: “It depends. How does the Auditor’s new valuation of your property compare to the property’s true value?”

Client: “What do you mean ‘true value?'”

Attorney: “I mean, if you put the property on the market and offered it for sale, is the Auditor’s valuation lower than or higher than that value?.”

Client: “Oh, I would never sell it for that number. I mean, my property is worth a whole lot more than that.”

Attorney: “Then, don’t bring the case. The Board of Revision compares the Auditor’s valuation to the true value and adjusts the valuation accordingly. For single family homes, they use comparable sales of other properties. Actual sales.”

Client: “But my valuation went up by 40%! I mean there is no way my property increased in value 40% in three years.”

Attorney: “Well, that may be true, but how do we know the Auditor had not undervalued your property three years ago, and is just getting it right now?”

Client: “But the Auditor has my neighbor’s property valued for less than mine and the houses are the same.”

Attorney: “None of those things matter. They really don’t. The Board of Revision can’t even consider those things. The only question is the comparison of your home’s true worth versus how the Auditor has assessed it and that comparison hinges off of comparable sales in your neighborhood.”

Some basic concepts:

The concepts are hard to swallow sometimes:

The Board of Revision takes a fresh look at valuation when a challenge is brought.
How the Auditor’s current value compares to the true value of the property (typically as established by comparable sales in your neighborhood) is the only yardstick of value in the current cycle.
The percentage increase of your property valuation from the prior cycle is completely irrelevant to that analysis. Completely.
The Auditor’s opinion of the value of your neighbor’s property also is completely irrelevant to that question
Both data and arguments relating to those issues are inadmissible before the Board of Revision. If you try to talk about those things at your hearing, you will be shot down by the panel. Period. Just don’t go there.
The Auditor does not have to justify how he came up with his valuation of your property. In fact, he is completely within his rights and authority under Ohio law to choose any value he wants for your property for absolutely no justification at all. That’s simply how the law is written. It is the statutory prerogative of the Auditor. If you don’t like it, then YOU can run for Auditor.
At a hearing, it is the taxpayer’s burden to prove the correct valuation. The Auditor does not have to prove anything.
NOTE: The result of a Board of Revision challenge to your property’s valuation could well be an increase, rather than a reduction. Be forewarned.
From 2008 to 2015 — throughout the real estate recession (some would say depression) — it was relatively easy to get valuations reduced for many properties. However, with the rising tide of real estate prices, those hoping for quick and easy savings should think twice. They may well get a surprise — an increase rather than a reduction.
If you don’t like the law, don’t be mad at us. We are not legislators or judges. We didn’t make these rules.

Free how-to video:

Here is a complete videotaped seminar presented by attorney Christopher P. Finney on property tax valuation reduction with step-by-step instructions.

More help:

For questions (other than those in the sample call, above!), feel free to contact Christopher P. Finney (513-943-6655).

County Auditor Dusty Rhodes and Chris Finney present to REIA on Property Tax Reduction

By Christopher P. FinneyJanuary 5, 2018August 5, 2022

Tonight, Hamilton County Auditor Dusty Rhodes and attorney Chris Finney presented to the Greater Cincinnati Real Estate Investors Association on the topic of “Property Tax Reduction.”

The presentation went in-depth in instructing property owners on the procedure to reduce the Auditor’s valuation of real property in Ohio to achieve tax savings.

We thank the County Auditor for appearing with us in this important public service! And we thank REIA founder Vena Jones-Cox and REIA President Scott Ellsworth for making this presentation possible.

Property owners are reminded that March 31 of each year is the deadline in Ohio for tax challenges. You may call Chris Finney (943-6655) for more information.

Brave the cold weather and join us this evening for a presentation on Property Tax Reduction with Dusty Rhodes and Chris Finney at REIA

By Christopher P. FinneyJanuary 4, 2018August 5, 2022

Tonight, Hamilton County Auditor Emerson “Dusty” Rhodes and Finney Law Firm attorney Chris Finney present on “Property Tax Reduction” at the Greater Cincinnati Real Estate Investors Association (REIA) at 6 PM at the Ramada Plaza at 11320 Chester Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45246 on Thursday, January 4 at 6 PM.

A dinner is served beforehand at 5:30 PM.

The meeting is open for free to REIA members and first-time attendees can obtain a free guest pass here. REIA’s program announcement is here. REIA’s web site is here.

Please join us!

Federal Income Taxes: One more note for pre-payers

By Christopher P. FinneyDecember 29, 2017August 5, 2022

Our blog and every major media outlet has been writing about pre-payment of 2018 real estate taxes (see prior blog entries). So, for procrastinators on pre-payment (how’s that for a mind-bender?), do you have to drive to the Treasurers office today to do that so that the payment is posted in 2017?

No.

Here’s the update from our crack paralegal team today:

According to the Treasurer’s Office, they post the payments as of the date of the postmark from the post office.

Also, they do have options for paying the real estate taxes online (via credit card), however there are convenience fees that are charged (credit card, 2.5%; electronic check, $1.50 per check).

If mailing a check, make sure the parcel number is in the memo of each check. I would also mail with each check a copy of the summary from the Auditor showing the new annual tax amount.

So, save yourself the trip and wait in line. Drop that check on the mail.

Federal Income Tax: IRS muddies the waters on pre-payment of 2018 real estate taxes, but our “advice” stands: Pay them now!

By Christopher P. FinneyDecember 29, 2017August 5, 2022

Last week, Congress passed and President Trump signed the most sweeping tax reform package in more than two decades. And one significant provision of that bill as to individuals is the cap on deductibility of state and local taxes at $10,000 in tax year 2018 and going forward.

This led to our “advice” here that Ohio taxpayers may want to pay their entire (both halves) 2018 real estate tax bills before year’s end to attempt to grab that additional (and perhaps final) deduction in 2017.

(Let us emphasize again the word “may.” Your specific situation may differ. Consult your tax professional for advice as to your specific circumstance.)

IRS Advisory muddies the waters

Since that advice, the IRS has muddied the waters by issuing this advisory. In there, they caution that the 2017 deduction (already condition based upon individual circumstances) applies only if taxes are “assessed” and “paid” in 2017.

(OK, this is going to get confusing. Perhaps we know “too much” about Ohio real estate taxes making this so complicated.)

What does “assessed” mean?

What exactly does “assessed” mean? In Ohio, taxes are “a lien on the real estate” for the tax year in question on January 1 of that year. Since the proposed-to-be-pre-paid 2018 taxes in Ohio are in fact the 2017 taxes (confusing we know, but Ohio real estate tax law is intentionally confusing), then they would seem to be “assessed” as of January 1, 2017, at least as to how this author sees things.

But even though taxes are a “lien” and are “assessed” as of January 1, 2017, when they are “determined” as to amount is another matter.

In Ohio, as in most states, property taxes are a product of multiplying the tax rate times the assessed valuation of property. For every County in southwest Ohio (except Warren) and most major urban counties in Ohio (Hamilton, Butler, Clermont, Montgomery, Franklin, and Cuyahoga), 2017 is a new “re-valuation” year, meaning that the bills coming out in 2018 will have brand new valuations. Those valuations were only finalized by the various county auditors in September or October of this year.

Then, the rate. Tax rates are determined in Ohio for the tax year in question only after the November election results have been finalized. Levies passed in that election apply retroactively to January 1 of that year, here 2017.

Does “assessed” mean “determined”?

Now this is where it gets super-confusing. From our perspective, taxes have been assessed for 2017 (payable in 2018) as of January 1 of this year, but the amount of the tax bill in some counties was only very recently determined (and as to Warren County as of this writing has not yet been determined).

So, if the IRS means “determined” in terms of amount when saying “assessed,” then it derives the entirely illogical and unfair result that folks who pre-pay their real estate tax bills in 2017 in Hamilton, Butler, and Clermont Counties can deduct those payments, but folks in Warren County, where that determination appears to be lagging for a few days or weeks, cannot. It makes utterly no sense.

(As we wrote here, In Warren and certain other counties where the amount has not been finally determined, your 2017 tax year payment may be based on the amount you paid for the 2016 tax year payment.)

Conclusion

Given the last-minute scramble that Congress created with the passage of tax reform, it is from our perspective inexcusable that the IRS chose to inject this uncertainty into what otherwise should be a straightforward matter. But that is the nature of this federal agency. Why make things simple, when they can be hopelessly complicated?

However, as to prepayment of Ohio taxes, our advice set forth in our original email and blog entry stands: Pay them now. The worst-case scenario is that you will have paid the taxes, respectively, one month and seven months too early. No real harm. But if we are “right” that they are deductible if paid this year, but may not be next year, then it means a 25% to 39% “savings” on that payment for you (because of the deduction).

Thus, pay them now!

Read more about the last-minute confusion created by the IRS below:

Washington Post: If you prepaid property taxes, will you get the deduction? If not, can you get your money back?

New York Times: Prepaying Your Property Tax? I.R.S. Cautions It Might Not Pay Off

We hope this clarified things, and did not further confuse them for you.

Ohio Employment Law: What exactly IS sexual harassment?

By Stephen E. ImmDecember 28, 2017August 5, 2022

The term “sexual harassment” is in constant use these days. Hardly a day goes by without a new story about a politician, celebrity, athlete, businessman, or even judge being accused of it. But what exactly does the term “sexual harassment” mean?

The term means something different in the law than it does in ordinary conversation. If we hear an employee made a sexually inappropriate comment in front of coworkers, or hear that he told a sexually explicit joke in the workplace, we are likely to say or think, “That’s sexual harassment.” And most people would understand what we mean, and would agree with our description.

But that’s not what the law means when analyzing a court case of “sexual harassment.”

Why the difference? And what is the legal definition of “sexual harassment?”

Basically, there are two types of sexual harassment under the law. One is called “quid pro quo.” This is a Latin phrase meaning “this for that.” In a quid pro quo case of harassment, the receipt of employment benefits (such as keeping one’s job, getting a promotion, etc.) is made to hinge on granting sexual favors. A classic case of quid pro quo sexual harassment would be an employee being fired because she wouldn’t go out with her boss. The conditioning of benefits in a quid pro quo case doesn’t have to be explicit. In fact, it rarely is. More often the “quid pro quo” is implied, rather than stated openly. Either way, it is completely illegal.

The other type of sexual harassment is called a “hostile work environment.” In this case, the employee is not pressured to give in to sexual advances in order to keep her job or obtain benefits, but rather is subject to a pattern of inappropriate behavior in the workplace. The behavior is usually sexual in nature, and has the effect of causing employees of a certain gender – usually women – to feel threatened, humiliated, or harassed at work. Examples include physical acts like unwanted touching, and non-physical behavior like lewd comments or “jokes,” and the display of sexuality explicit material.

A legal case for a “hostile work environment” requires that the offensive behavior be “severe or pervasive.” The occasional inappropriate joke or comment usually will not – by itself – be enough to create what the law considers a hostile work environment. But if it is happening every other day it can be a different story. And if the behavior crosses over into the physical – unwelcome touching or assault, for instance – or if the language used is physically threatening, a “hostile work environment” can be created by even a single act.

These lines – such as between what is “severe or pervasive” and what isn’t – can sometimes be difficult to see. Both employees and employers should reach out to qualified employment counsel to understand these issues and protect their rights. Now more than ever.

Federal Income Tax: Urgent 2017 year-end notice about real estate taxes

By Christopher P. FinneyDecember 25, 2017August 5, 2022

We have a critical federal income tax issue of note for consideration by our clients:

>>> You may benefit from pre-paying your 2017 real estate/property tax bill(s) before year’s end.

>>> County Treasurers in Hamilton County, Butler County, Clermont County and Warren County have confirmed that you can determine and pay your entire 2018 real estate tax liability (both halves) before December 31, 2017.

The just-passed federal tax bill caps deductibility of combined state and local income and property taxes at $10,000 per individual or married couple (the cap is the same regardless) for tax year 2018 and going forward, but that cap does not apply in 2017.
Thus, if your state and local income and real estate tax liability is expected to exceed $10,000 in 2018, you may strongly benefit from pre-paying property taxes due in 2018 right now.
We have checked with Hamilton County, Clermont County, Butler County and Warren County. Each County allows the prepayment of your entire 2018 property tax bills (technically the 2017 bills payable in 2018) before year’s end.
That means you may have the ability to pre-pay both halves before December 31, 2017 and obtain that deduction for the 2017 tax year.
The 2017 tax year property values have only been calculated for Hamilton County, and those values may be ascertained by going to this link.
For those remaining counties, your 2017 tax year payment may be based on the amount you paid for the 2016 tax year payment.
For more information on how to pay, please click on the relevant link(s) below.

In Ohio:

For Hamilton County … Click Here and Here
For Clermont County … Click Here and Here
For Warren County … Click Here and Here
For Butler County … Click Here, Here, and Here

In Kentucky:

Property taxes are due in September (City) and October (County) and therefore they cannot be pre-paid.

Your specific situation may differ. If you are subject to an Alternative Minimum Tax, for example, this pre-payment may not benefit you.

For more information on this and other federal income tax questions, contact Isaac T. Heintz at (513) 943-6654 or Eli Kraft-Jacobs at (513)797-2853.

Ohio Real Property Law: Attorney Chris Finney and County Auditor Dusty Rhodes to present on “Property Tax Reduction” at the Cincinnati Real Estate Investors Association

By Christopher P. FinneyDecember 24, 2017August 5, 2022

Finney Law Firm attorney Chris Finney and County Auditor Emerson”Dusty” Rhodes present on “Property Tax Reduction” at the Greater Cincinnati Real Estate Investors Association (REIA) at 6 PM at the Ramada Plaza at 11320 Chester Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45246 on Thursday, January 4 at 6 PM. A dinner is served beforehand at 5:30 PM.

The meeting is open for free to REIA members and first-time attendees can obtain a free guest pass here. REIA’s program announcement is here. REIA’s web site is here.

The January 4 meeting is a monthly General Membership meeting of REIA.

For more than ten years, Chris Finney is pleased to have been joined by the County Auditor to present this important topic on legal techniques to reduce your property taxes. In short, your tax bill is a product of multiplying your tax rate times the subjective value the auditor has placed upon your real property. There is a quasi-judicial procedure to challenge and potentially reduce the second portion of the equation — the valuation number. This course addresses the procedures that attorneys or property owners themselves can follow to achieve this annualized savings.

If you can’t make the program, a detailed “How To” video from Finney Law Firm is here.

Ohio Employment Law: Are Employers Allowed to Search their Employees?

By Stephen E. ImmDecember 12, 2017August 5, 2022

Let’s say a retail store is experiencing a high volume of theft. It suspects that some of its inventory loss may be due to employee theft. So it decides to start searching its employees when they leave the store. This is being done randomly, and is not necessarily based on individualized suspicion of particular employees. Can the employer do this? Is it legal? If so, exactly how far can an employer go in searching its employees?

There is a huge difference in this area of the law between government employers and private employers. Government employers are subject to the fourth amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. This means that a government employer normally may not search an employee, or his/her personal effects, without “probable cause” to believe the employee has done something wrong.

Private employers, however, are not bound by the fourth amendment. They therefore have a much freer hand when it comes to employee searches. Since the worksite is the property of the employer, it ordinarily has the right to inspect any part of that property – desks, lockers, computers, etc. – when it sees fit to do so. This is not an unlimited right, however. The employer cannot, of course, go into areas where its employees have a justifiable expectation of privacy, such as bathrooms.

But what about searching employees’ purses or bags or briefcases while the employees are on the employer’s property? This is a little trickier. If an employer has clearly informed its employees, in advance of any searches, that their personal belongings may be subject to search while they are on the employer’s premises, then it is likely that the employees do not have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” with respect to those articles when they are at work. Accordingly, under those circumstances the search of an employee’s personal effects typically will not violate the employee’s rights. Employers must clearly communicate, however, that they reserve the right to conduct these searches. This can be done in an employee handbook, or by clearly posted signs in the workplace, such as in a break room or other common areas.

If employees are not informed in advance that their personal effects may be searched while on the employer’s property, an employer’s search of such items as purses or briefcases might be considered illegal by a court.

Employers should keep in mind, however, that just because it can conduct a particular search doesn’t mean that it should. As a matter of good employee relations, employers should always be respectful of their employees, and should think carefully before subjecting them to searches that a reasonable person would consider unduly intrusive.

If you have questions or concerns about your rights in this area, whether as an employer or employee, be sure to consult competent legal counsel before taking any action or making any decisions.

Ohio commercial law: Can a seller sell that which he does not own?

By Christopher P. FinneyDecember 8, 2017August 5, 2022

An issue that manifests itself in any number of scenarios is the seemingly odd question: Can a seller contract to sell something that he does not own.

Somewhat surprisingly, the answer can be “yes.”

Hypothetical sale of stock

Let’s take a theoretical situation in which a seller promises to sell to a buyer 1,000 shares of the Procter & Gamble Corporation for $100 per share on the 2nd of January, 2018 (a date that as of this writing has not yet come), but the seller does not own any Procter and Gamble at the time of making such agreement. Is that contract enforceable against the buyer? As against the seller?

Sure. If the seller does not own 1,000 shares of Procter & Gamble Corporation at the time of the contract, he had better make arrangements to get that stock under his ownership or to find a party who does own those shares who will fulfill the seller’s promises.

OK, but what about real property?

But come on, that’s perfectly fine as to a publicly-traded stock, but what about property that is entirely unique, not replaceable with “equal or like-kind” property, and under the control of a third party?

Well, the same principle applies. If the seller is going to make a binding promise to sell that asset, and he wants to avoid being sued for breach of contract, he had better figure out how to either get title to the property before the promised closing date, or otherwise arrange for the cooperation of the property owner.

The basis for fraud?

The story is as old as the bridge. A gullible tourist goes to New York City and a local shyster sells them the Brooklyn Bridge. The seller does not own the bridge at the time of the contract, so it’s an enforceable contract, right?

Well, in that classic case, and in the case of other instances of fraud, selling property that the seller does not own could well be a badge of fraud. If he knew at the time of contracting that he did not have title, and could not obtain title to the property in question, then the promise to sell that asset clearly would be fraud.

What if the seller claims that he thought he would be able to obtain the asset before the promised closing date, but was just unsuccessful. Depending on his intentions, and the affirmative representations made by seller in conjunction with the sale, the failure of performance could be simple breach of contract, or it could be actionable fraud.

The peril for the seller

The peril for the seller who does not own the asset he promises to sell is that in order to avoid claims both for breach of contract and fraud, he will need to “pay the price” to get that asset into his name before the date of his performance. In the case of Procter and Gamble Stock, if the price on the NYSE rises of $150 per share before the first of the year, he may just need to take a loss at $50 per share to assure fulfillment of his contractual obligations. In the case of unique property owned or controlled by a third party, the seller may be in great peril as he will be under the mercy of that seller to “name his price” and terms to transfer the asset to the seller who has promised it any a date certain to a certain buyer.

Conclusion

This concept comes into play in various scenarios. And the first instinct of parties — and attorneys — is to think you can’t promise to sell that which you don’t own. A seller can. But he should carefully consider the consequences of that decision.

Previous page 1 … 50 51 52 53 54 … 105 Next page