Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Appeals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears proposal to let residential tax‑appeal cases opt for streamlined, informal MTAB review
Summary
Senate Bill 302 would allow residential taxpayers to waive their right to district‑court appeal and opt for an informal Montana Tax Appeal Board review to reduce time and legal costs on small cases; MTAB and Property Assessment Division witnesses supported the option but committee members asked for clearer rulemaking authority and definitions of 'informal.'
Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, sponsor of Senate Bill 302, described his experience on the Montana Tax Appeal Board and told the House Taxation Committee the bill would permit residential taxpayers who appeal to MTAB to elect an informal hearing process in exchange for waiving the right to appeal to district court. He said the provision would allow the board to issue shorter decisions and reduce the disproportionate legal burden that current, voluminous records impose on minor residential disputes.
Travis Brown, chairman of the Montana Tax Appeal Board, testified in favor, saying the option would let MTAB conduct quicker reviews for smaller residential cases without extensive discovery or lengthy written opinions. Robin Rude, deputy administrator with the Property Assessment Division, described the historical practice in the 1990s when hearings were more informal and agreed the current case load often requires expensive staff and outside experts even for small valuations.
Committee members asked whether the informal process would still produce written decisions, whether such decisions could create precedent, and how rules would be established. MTAB said it would issue written decisions for informal hearings, but the sponsor and witnesses advised that clarifying rulemaking authority in the statute would be helpful. Several representatives said they would consider an amendment to provide specific rulemaking language so taxpayers understand what the informal option entails and the consequences of waiving appeal rights.
Zolnikov closed by saying the bill is narrowly tailored to residential cases and that the most complex commercial or high‑value cases would remain subject to the current, formal record. The committee closed the hearing after discussion; no vote was taken.
