ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This matter came before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-60-2940 (2000) for a contested case hearing requested by the
Petitioner against the Greenwood County Auditor (Auditor), seeking a pro rata refund of property taxes paid on a 1994
Mazda truck for the 2001 tax year. A hearing was held before me at the offices of the Administrative Law Judge Division
(Division) in Columbia, South Carolina on November 27, 2001.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Having carefully considered all testimony, exhibits, and arguments presented at the hearing of this matter, and taking into
account the credibility and accuracy of the evidence, I make the following findings of fact by a preponderance of evidence:
1. This Division has procedural and subject matter jurisdiction over this case.
2. The parties have exhausted their prehearing remedies. Furthermore, notice of the date, time, place and subject matter of
the hearing was timely given to all parties.
3. New Haven Associates (New Haven) owns a 1994 Mazda truck which is titled in the name of New Haven. New Haven
owns New Haven Apartments and the primary business of New Haven is managing New Haven Apartments. Furthermore,
though the truck is used for other purposes, the truck is primarily used in the business of New Haven Apartments. In fact,
New Haven Apartments has a business office at the location of the apartments in the city of Greenwood.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude the following as a matter of law:
1. S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600 (1986 & Supp.2000) grants jurisdiction to the Division to hear contested cases under the
Administrative Procedures Act. S.C. Code Ann. §12-60-2920 (2000) authorizes the Division to conduct contested case
hearings concerning property tax assessment decisions made by county auditors.
2. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-210 (2000) defines property which is taxable in South Carolina as follows:
All real and personal property in this State, personal property of residents of this State which may be kept or used
temporarily out of the State, with the intention of bringing it into the State, or which has been sent out of the State for sale
and not yet sold, and all moneys, credits and investments in bonds, stocks, joint-stock companies or otherwise of persons
resident in this State shall be subject to taxation.
3. The Petitioner contends that the vehicle should not be subject to Greenwood city taxes because it is owned by New
Haven whose office is located in his home and outside of the city limits. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-890 (2000) provides that:
"All . . . vehicles used in any business . . . shall be returned for taxation and taxed in the county, city and town in which it
is situated. All other personal property shall be returned for taxation and taxed at the place where the owner thereof shall
reside at the time of listing the same, if the owner reside in this State; if not, at the residence of the person having it in
charge." In other words, a vehicle used in a business is to be taxed at the place where the business is located. Additionally,
"[a] determination of where business personalty is situated depends upon the totality of facts for the tax year. . . ." 1995 WL
117041, *1 (S.C.A.G.). However, it is immaterial if the owner is a county resident and not a city resident, if the business
property is, in fact, used within the city. See 1979 WL 43208, *1 (S.C.A.G.); See also 1979 S.C. Op. Atty. Gen. 68; 1979
S.C. Op. Atty. Gen. No. 79-54; 1979 WL 29060, *4 (S.C.A.G.) ("If [a] mobile home has a tax situs in [a] county it would
be subject to taxation by the county notwithstanding that the principal office of the business was in another county.")
In this case, New Haven's primary business is the management of New Haven Apartments which is located in the city of
Greenwood. Furthermore, the vehicle is primarily used by New Haven Apartments. Therefore, for tax purposes, the
vehicle is situated in the city of Greenwood and is subject to taxes accessed by the city of Greenwood.
ORDER
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner's 1994 Mazda truck is subject to Greenwood city taxes for the 2001 tax
year.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
Ralph King Anderson, III
Administrative Law Judge
March 15, 2002
Columbia, South Carolina |
