This dispute centered around the assessment of real estate taxes for the year 2006. As of the date of assessment, a limited liability company (an LLC) owned the land. Subsequently, it was transferred to a different LLC. A third entity, a corporation, which owned both of the LLCs actually paid the taxes in dispute. Shortly thereafter, the corporation merged with another corporation, creating yet another entity. Subsequently, this successor corporation paid taxes on the realty and applied to the Town for an abatement for the years 2006 and 2007. After denial of the application, an appeal was taken to the Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA).
At the BTLA, the Town moved to dismiss, arguing that the entity seeking the abatement was not the legal owner of the real estate, although it did own the LLC that was the record owner. The BTLA granted this motion, saying that only the record owner of real estate may apply for an abatement, and that no other entity has "legal standing" to contest an assessment of real estate taxes.
The Supreme Court reversed, finding that the relationship between the corporation and the LLC was close enough to warrant a finding of standing. Here, the corporation had actually used its resources to pay an obligation of the LLC, which it owned. This payment of funds formed the basis of its complaint about the assessed value of the land, and the alleged injury of the over-assessment, giving it the ability to proceed with the appeal.
The case does not resolve a problem that tax collectors face nearly every day, which is whether they should accept tax payments from persons who are not the record owners of real estate. While it may seem that a municipality should accept payment anytime that it is offered, it is actually more complex. For example, if the tax remains unpaid in whole or in part, the collector must execute the tax lien in favor of the municipality. Now, assume a person with no legal interest in the land seeks to make a payment on the taxes due. Pursuant to RSA 80:69, only a person with a legal interest in the land may redeem it from the tax lien, and pursuant to RSA 80:71, only a person with a legal interest in the land may make a partial payment in redemption. Thus, it really does matter who is making payments on real estate tax bills, and the result in this case makes the issue that much more uncertain.