Opinion
No. 71-400
Decided December 27, 1972. Rehearing denied January 16, 1973. Certiorari denied March 12, 1973.
Owner of mobile home park challenged assessor's action in assessing to plaintiff certain portable and removable carport and patio covers attached to mobile homes in his mobile home park. From judgment in favor of plaintiff, appeal was taken.
Affirmed
1. TAXATION — Carports and Patio Covers — Personal Property — Mobile Home Owners — Return of Taxes — Paid by Park Owner — Proper Conclusion. Where trial court found that carports and patio covers added to mobile homes in plaintiff's mobile home park were and remained the personal property of mobile home owners and that they were being taxed according to statutes on taxation of mobile homes which taxation was to be in lieu of all ad valorem taxes upon such property, these findings are supported by the record and trial court's conclusion that plaintiff was entitled to return of taxes he had paid on such personalty was a proper application of the law.
2. Mobile Homes — Treated — Different Basis — Equally — No Violation — Uniformity Clause. Since mobile homes are specifically treated on a different basis than conventional homes and since all mobile home owners are treated equally, such taxation is not a violation of the Uniformity Clause of the Colorado constitution.
Appeal from the District Court of Adams County, Honorable Clifford Gobble, Judge.
Aldo G. Notarianni and Kenuff D. Wolford, for plaintiff-appellee.
David Berger, County Attorney, for defendants-appellants.
This is an action by the landowner (plaintiff), the owner of a mobile home park located in Adams County, to recover $6,540.93 paid under protest because of a claimed erroneous tax assessment for the year 1969. An increased valuation in the assessment of plaintiff's property resulted when the County Assessor assessed to plaintiff certain portable and removable carport and patio covers attached to trailer houses or mobile homes located in plaintiff's mobile home park. The carport covers and patio covers are admittedly not the property of plaintiff but are the property of the individual mobile home owners. When a tenant leaves the park, he takes the patio cover or carport cover with him.
The individual cement slabs and permanent improvements on the landowner's property are owned by and are assessed to the landowner. In 1968 the carport and patio covers were assessed to the individual trailer house or mobile home owners. In 1969 the assessor ceased making the assessment against the individuals and made the assessment against the owner of the real estate. The trial court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff for the amount of taxes paid under protest together with accrued interest. Defendants contend that the patio and carport covers should be assessed to the landowner. We disagree, and affirm.
At the conclusion of the trial, the court found in part as follows:
"4. That the items in dispute herein; namely the patio and carport covers or accessories which are attached to certain mobile homes located in plaintiff's mobile home park, are paid for and owned by the mobile home owners and not by the plaintiff that they are brought into the park by the mobile home owners and when attached to the mobile home become a part of the mobile home the same as awnings or the windows, curtains, rugs or carpets.
"5. That said carport and patio covers or accessories originally were, and by the acts and intentions of the parties continue to be and remain, personal property and do not become part of the real estate upon which said mobile homes are temporarily located.
"6. That said carport and patio covers or accessories when so attached to said mobile homes do not become real estate but remain personal property because the entire mobile home unit is personal property and is so classified by the Colorado Statutes.
"7. That the Colorado Statutes specifically provide the methods by which mobile homes may be taxed; namely, a graduated annual specific ownership tax which shall be in lieu of all ad valorem taxes upon such property, and the evidence shows that said mobile homes are being taxed in that manner."
[1] The findings of the court are supported by the record and its conclusions of law are proper application of the law. Mesa Verde Co. v. Board of County Commissioners, 178 Colo. 49, 495 P.2d 229, clearly recognized the requirement of a finding of ownership of the improvement in order to support an assessment of ad valorem taxes.
Pursuant to the mandate contained in Colo. Const. Art. X, Sec. 3, the legislature passed legislation providing for the annual payment of a graduated specific ownership tax on mobile homes to the county clerk and recorder of any county of the state in which the situs of the mobile home is established at the time of registration. 1965 Perm. Supp., C.R.S. 1963, 13-3-9(4). This statute further provides that such tax shall constitute the entire tax payable on such mobile home, and be in lieu of all ad valorem taxes upon such home.
[2] The argument that the decision of the trial court results in a violation of Colo. Const. Art. X, Sec. 3, known as the Uniformity Clause, is answered by Ames v. People, 26 Colo. 83, 56 P. 656:
"The uniformity and equality enjoined by the constitution require only that the same means and methods be applied impartially to all the constituents of each class, so that it operates equally and uniformly upon all persons and corporations in similar circumstances."
Mobile homes are specifically treated on a different basis than conventional homes for tax purposes. There is no lack of uniformity in that all mobile home owners are treated equally.
There is no statutory provision for increasing the graduated specific ownership tax on mobile homes for improvements made to such homes. If the statutory machinery is not effective, it is for the legislature and not the assessor to supply the remedy. McMillan v. Board of County Commissioners, 113 Colo. 387, 157 P.2d 146.
Judgment affirmed.
JUDGE DWYER and JUDGE PIERCE concur.