|
• There was one PPetitioiri appealed. `The Petitioner/Agent used'a model developed by;�
<br />and applied gthe Percent Remaining Value:(PRV) to a spreadsheet shown iri'Section.4.of.their.;
<br />data. Tile spreadsheet is broken.'down by Site Code (Store locafioh) and asset'.d s.criptiorir: Each assef.:.'
<br />description's. reported cost. was•indexed' to -kap cedebt: Cost Newbyia factor.: of 1,00:' The.use
<br />factor does. not change the Reported Cost and • does not establish;Repiacement Cost: New:. -No data was .
<br />:....presented showing source of Index,.factor Then, a•••percent good factoTr was applietl.to'•determinetheir
<br />indexed. market value• No photos were includediii the report `TheiP;etitioner%Agent's. evidence vias '
<br />• accepted.and.will be: co.risid•eredt:•:
<br />:Find'iri> s:of,Fact::'
<br />All- of the evidence••was`adrrlitted and cortsideretl; Rules 120-9:025, 120 9', 7 F:A.Cr.and ;UOR Teaming
<br />Module•:11, •discuss admitted;- relevant and 'sufficiency,.of .evidence, a prig with th'e.'standard:of proof
<br />being '.preponderance °ofalso discusses' evidence being admissible but not
<br />nece'ssa.rilysufficieht ':. •;
<br />The..PA:believes;thafaf?ey Have ow
<br />*.di. 'Cot •an ..: a c •
<br />'. . ures ... . °,.daprofessronai appraisal practices;., .�
<br />procedand_standards They also:believe that.the presumption.of dorrectriess has;bee.n main'ta,ined.. .
<br />and..that their evidence proves by a preponderance of the evidence tl at:tl eir. just Value methodology
<br />•complies with:.F.5, 1 011'$e F S, 4.94.1"84.... The" depreciationsched_ulesi testirm.oriy, site visits; .photos;'
<br />returns, studies, arid; comparables presented by the PA show thattfiey hav followedthe procedures and
<br />• guidelines: • . ''
<br />: According.to: the :.retu n, thel.'ages ofthe.a_ssets:.range fr(* .. . .:Therefore, this .:puts into.
<br />-.: ••
<br />question-how:the older,.assets were treated.within the•model The:.model classifications/NUL•ranges are
<br />from 3'=-15.years.only..:::On:'Page 3 of he modeli:the"Appraiser states that was hired to_develop.a `
<br />valuation' model, (not ai appraisal) a:nd that the model doesnot:;arrive at. -a value or.raiige: of: values• for
<br />an asset.. The Appraiser stat4that the model is designed for the;Client to.:arrive at an. estimate of .fa ir;•••'
<br />marketvalue by applyiiig the Percent RemainingValue (PRV)tablestothe:cost-new.:. •
<br />.As the Petitioner'.Ageni did�;not:attend :� uest'o i . v
<br />/,,g.-,,._ _•
<br />,q .) . s with.regardto.Cheir euidenct could not be.arisvieretl,';:.
<br />'••Relating: to 'tele spreadsheet by Site::.Code,, the concerns 'are the source of tfieir.;'index factor, asset
<br />classification comparrsoh betv�ieerl;the .model and. their asset description 'and:.ciarifcation of
<br />.,. percent': good.• factors used';.by .and petitioner/Agent on detail.ed: asset list: '-Neitheir•..the:
<br />Petitioner/Agent nor .discusses how; assets older.`than .::15 years are treated:, ' IIn•the asset ''
<br />classification: by'.r signage is given a -'Normal Usefui'.lifeof 5 years.: Based`,on. the review of.the
<br />' returns, the: age;; of the{some of the signage goes back:as far ash the Petitioner/Agent:Taxpayer's-:::
<br />':Opin.ion and:: Appraisal.yalue arethe,same figures As mientioned..by'the PA; they. requested' the work- ',
<br />;flies to. support the 1 LLmodel but.did not' receive' any such-'da'ta. The majority:of dalers' listed;in•tf-e
<br />report from relate to restaurant/warehousew style assets No data: was presented support' the;';:.
<br />..percentages ued,for the EDP,.offipe'.equipment and furniture. shown oji'the spreadsheets Ali; ofPOP.'`
<br />• equipment was:given"ata year: NUL. (includes POS systems, compuUP•
<br />ters, SJ;rrioriitors, printers, barcode.
<br />;scanners; Servers, routers and'.forklift'batteries).' The deaLef .contactd
<br />et for the •NUL of these types: of•
<br />'assets is,a restaur:antsupplier .Thi$ sarrle •dealer is used:for,..systern. s,:copiers and. securitysystems..
<br />The ..spreadsheet• inclucbs an , fie rimed cost
<br />:.:' (Reported cost $ i), ;(Reported cost
<br />�; fee orted cost'
<br />(Re orted
<br />•
<br />p:. 'Cosi$ ( eported,cost
<br />Re orted
<br />( . p:.• ,;::;cosi $ „ar)d'
<br />... >� ......:.. �";� :. . _.. .. '(Reposed; cost�.$�)::'��Afl of thrse.�
<br />":.line°i ni's have: been'gi ren -'a 10 year: NUL..; ln. reviewing;;the NUC asset Classifications:•established.by...
<br />
|