ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This matter comes before the Administrative Law Judge Division (ALJD) pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §
12-60-460 and S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600 (Supp. 2000). The Petitioner, Betty T. Brown, seeks a contested
case hearing concerning the Spartanburg County Auditor's decision to deny Petitioner the homestead
exemption for tax year 1998 on property located in Spartanburg County. After notice to all parties, a hearing
was conducted on April 12, 2001 at the ALJD in Columbia, South Carolina.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Having carefully considered the testimony and the arguments of both sides, and taking into account the
credibility of the evidence and witnesses, I find by a preponderance of the evidence:
1. Notice of the time, date, place and subject matter of the hearing was given to all parties in a timely
manner.
2. By deed dated March 30, 1960, Petitioner and her husband, C. Walter Brown, received title to the
subject property located at 109 Patrick Street, Spartanburg, South Carolina, identified as Tax Map Reference
Number 6-20-07-038.
3. Walter C. Brown turned 65 on January 30, 1991. In July 1992, Walter C. Brown applied for and
received the homestead exemption from Spartanburg County on this subject property.
4. On June 4, 1997, Walter C. Brown passed away and by Deed of Distribution dated August 5, 1997,
Betty T. Brown was granted his "one-half interest" in the subject property. Thereafter, Spartanburg County
dropped the homestead exemption on the property. There is conflicting testimony as to whether the
Petitioner was notified by the Auditor's office that she needed to reapply in order to continue receiving the
homestead exemption.
5. Petitioner applied for the homestead exemption on December 4, 2000. Spartanburg County replaced
the homestead exemption on the property and reimbursed Petitioner for the tax years 1999 and 2000.
Therefore, this appeal is for the reimbursement of monies paid in excess of the exemption for tax year 1998.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law, the following:
1. The ALJD has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-60-460 (2000)
and S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600 (Supp. 2000).
2. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-250 (2000) states that the homestead exemption "includes the dwelling
place when jointly owned in complete fee simple or life estate by husband and wife, and either has reached
sixty-five years of age. . . ."
3. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-255 (2000) determines the continuation of a homestead exemption. S.C. Code
Ann. § 12-37-255(a) sets forth:
When the homestead exemption is initially granted pursuant to § 12-37-250 of the 1976 Code it shall
continue to be effective for successive years in which the ownership of the homestead or the other
qualifications for the exemption remain unchanged. Notification of any change affecting eligibility shall be
given immediately to the county auditor.
4. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-250 (2000) also provides that "the application for the exemption must be made to
the auditor of the county . . . and a failure to apply constitutes a waiver of the exemption."
5. Statutory language creating a tax exemption is not liberally construed in favor of the taxpayer claiming
exemption. Citadel Development Foundation v. Greenville County, 279 S.C. 443, 447, 308 S.E.2d 797, 799
(Ct. App. 1983). When Petitioner received her husband's one-half interest in the subject property, the
ownership of the homestead changed. Upon application, Petitioner would have been eligible for the
exemption. However, Petitioner failed to apply for the exemption, and S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-250 sets
forth that failure to apply for the exemption acts as a waiver for that tax year. Furthermore, the Spartanburg
County Auditor was not required to notify Petitioner that she needed to apply for the exemption. In fact,
according to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-255, Petitioner was required to notify the Spartanburg County Auditor
of the change in ownership. Therefore, I find that Petitioner waived her homestead exemption for tax year
1998.
ORDER
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby:
ORDERED that the Spartanburg County Auditor's denial of a refund to Betty T. Brown for tax year 1998
be affirmed.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________
C. Dukes Scott
Administrative Law Judge
April 24, 2001
Columbia, South Carolina
|