Opinion
Nos. 76-302 and 76-303
Decided November 17, 1976.
Taxation — Real estate — Valuation — Determination of fair market value.
APPEALS from the Board of Tax Appeals.
Appellants in case No. 76-302 ( MacVeigh) purchased property in 1972, which the Auditor of Clermont County assessed at 35 percent of true market value based on the purchase price.
Appellants in case No. 76-303 ( Sheppard) purchased contiguous parcels of property in 1968 and 1972, which were assessed by the Clermont County auditor at 35 percent of true value based on the price of the land purchased in 1972.
Complaints were then filed by appellants with the Clermont County Board of Revision seeking decreases in the taxable value set by the county auditor for the tax year 1974. Appellants set forth, as their reasons for requesting reduction in the taxable value of such property, that, "if adjoining properties are assessed at less than true market value, whereas this property is assessed at market value, then adjoining property values should be raised to true market value or mine [appellants'] reduced."
The board of revision determined that the taxable value of appellants' property for the tax year 1974 was the same as that set by the auditor.
On the property owners' appeals to the Board of Tax Appeals, the board found that, "upon a consideration of the matter, as thus submitted, and there being only testimony by appellants' expert appraiser that the fair market value is higher than that shown * * * the fair market value of the subject real property on tax lien date January 1, 1974," was substantially the same as that determined by the board of revision.
Appeals as of right bring the causes to this court for review.
Mr. James W. Carpenter, for appellants.
Mr. Robert A. Jones, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. Robert P. Ringland, for appellee.
In Parkwood Iron Metal v. Bd. of Revision (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 6, this court had before it a property owner's argument that the sales price paid for the property there in question did not reflect its fair market value. The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, that the fair market value of the property was reflected by the purchase price of such property, was not found to be unreasonable or unlawful.
This court has said many times that the best method of determining value is an actual sale of property between one who is willing but not compelled to buy and one who is willing but not compelled to sell. See State, ex rel. Park Investment Co., v. Bd. of Tax Appeals (1964), 175 Ohio St. 410.
The fair market value of property for tax purposes is a question of fact, primarily to be determined by the taxing authorities. Cardinal Federal S. L. Assn. v. Bd. of Revision (1975), 44 Ohio St.2d 13.
The decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals are neither unreasonable nor unlawful and, on authority of Parkwood Iron Metal v. Bd. of Revision, supra, they are affirmed.
Decisions affirmed.
O'NEILL, C.J., HERBERT, CORRIGAN, STERN, CELEBREZZE, W. BROWN and P. BROWN, JJ., concur.