• Home
• Firm Overview
• Attorneys
• Practice Areas
• Resources
• Blog
  • Archive
• Contact Us

Big oil and gas companies appear to be the latest entities focused on finding legal remedy over erroneous volumes and revenues of natural gas reported to Colorado counties for properties they’ve invested in.

Despite the fact that the misreporting may have come from the companies themselves, the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of Oxy USA Inc. v. Mesa County Board of Commissioners, which laid the groundwork for gas and oil companies to be able to request abatement and refunds from counties or local taxing districts to recoup losses.

“The county has a track record of treating taxpayers fairly, so I believe they’ll pay it,” said Garfield County Assessor Jim Yellico.¹

Here’s A Recent List of Gas & Oil Companies that Filed for Abatements and Refunds From Colorado Counties

Big Oil & Gas Go After CO Counties for Abatements and Refunds | Denver Zoning Issues and Dispute Attorney

The following information on oil and gas companies that filed for abatements and refunds from counties and taxing districts was gather from news reports:

• In a Dec. 19 Denver Post news article, it was reported that Encana sought a $6 million refund, while Caerus Piceance, LLC claims they were owed $1.2 million.²
• Garfield County later claimed that Caerus was owed $1.1 million from the county, the local government, and school districts.
• Caerus also agreed to waive $155,000 in interest that was owed to them.
• In the Encana settlement, the county and other taxing districts still owed $858,000 in interest, which Encana would not waive. The county commissioners agreed to pay the interest out of a special gas and oil mitigation fund, which spared other taxing districts from paying back any money.

When is Abatement and Refund Owed?

An abatement and refund is owed when a taxpaying entity or person believes that their property has been erroneously or illegally taxed due to negligent or erroneous valuation for assessment, a mistake in levying, administrative error, or over valuation. The abatement and refund process is generally started when a taxpayer misses the deadline for protesting the assessor’s valuation. Taxpayers who feel they have been wronged, over-taxed, or over valuated can file an abatement petition with the county court to request either an abatement of taxes due or a refund of taxes already paid.

Contact a Denver Property Tax Lawyer at Downey & Associates, PC

Filing an abatement and refund petition is a complicated process that requires a knowledgeable and experienced Denver property tax lawyer. The Denver Property Tax Lawyer at Downey & Associates, PC has more than 30 years of experience in property tax law and dispute cases. To set up a free, initial consultation, call us today at 303-813-1111 or use the message form on the right-hand side of the page.

_______________________________________________________________

¹“Energy companies seek $7.2 million refund of property taxes overpaid in Garfield County” published in Denver Post, Dec. 2017.

²“Garfield County, Caerus Settle for $1.1M in Gas Production Dispute” published in Post Independent, March 2018.

Let’s be honest, the advent of online e-commerce for mega-retailers like Amazon, Apple, EBay, and even Walmart has flourished beyond belief over the last two decades; while mom and pop shops and many brick and mortar stores have crumbled under the weight of enticing Internet deals, no real Internet sales tax system, and a lot of times free shipping. Well, as if to finally call the Internet a rogue player, the U.S. Supreme Court in a huge 5-to-4 ruling, basically gave those businesses that are most likely long since gone a reprieve by calling for the collection of sales tax – same as any other retailer would have to do.¹

Essentially, what this ruling does is, it states: “Okay, guys, the jig is up. Your days of not paying point-of-purchase state taxes is over.”

Details, Allegations, and Claims in the Wayfair vs. South Dakota Sales Tax Case

Forthcoming Internet Sales Tax Benefits Consumers & Retailers | Denver Sales & Purchase Tax Counseling Attorney

The following details, allegations, and claims in the Wayfair vs. South Dakota sales tax case came from recent news reports:²

• The decision comes from the highest court in the U.S. after South Dakota filed suit against the giant online retailers Wayfair, Overstocked and Newegg concerning the fact that they weren’t collecting state sales tax.
• The case was titled: Wayfair vs. South Dakota.
• The jig is up philosophy is definitely heard in the majority opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy. He stated: The Supreme Court believes online retailers should no longer deserve “an arbitrary advantage over their competitors, who collect state sales taxes” by merely saying they don’t have a presence in that state.
• The Internet’s dynamic power and near omnipresence, Justice Kennedy explained, have led to major Internet retailers not collecting sales taxes that in turn have cost states upwards of $33 billion in missed sales tax revenue annually.
• Some of the evidence the court presented, included:
  • The fact that only 2% of Americans had Internet access in 1992, as compared with 89% currently.
  • E-commerce sales when they began only amounted to .8% of all U.S. retail sales. Today that figure is 9%, which is expected to grow exponentially.
• More traditional retailers view the move as leveling the playing field. Now all retailers can compete on fair and level sales tax rules.
• The ruling overturned two previous Supreme Court rulings that held that states could not require retailers to collect and pay sales taxes if those retailers were not physically located in the point-of-purchase state.

The over-riding positive impact this new sales tax surplus will supply is more money in each state’s coffers, so they’ll have more budget surplus on hand without having to raise taxes, hopefully.

Contact a Denver Sales & Purchase Tax Counseling Attorney at Downey & Associates, PC

Does your company need consultation about developing an Internet sales tax collection system? If so, contact the Denver Sales & Purchase Tax Counseling Attorney at Downey & Associates, PC. To schedule an appointment, call us today at 303-813-1111 or send us an e-mail.

__________________________________________________________________

¹“The Supreme Court Decision That Will Put More Taxes on Internet Sales is Good News for You” published in Business Insider, June 2018.

²“What the Supreme Court’s Internet Sales Tax Ruling Says about the State of Retail” published in Forbes, June 2018.

Move over Erin Brockovich and make way for the “Little Pink House!” Another real-life heroine has come to the big screen in the form of a working-class woman determined to save her cottage-style house in New London, CT. Based on a true story, the movie stars Catherine Keener as Susette Kelo and focuses on her attempts to save her house from eminent domain. Kelo took her case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“I walked in this house, and this feeling I have to say of being here all my life came upon me,” Kelo said in an interview with Megan Kelly on the Today Show. Kelo bought the property in the 1990s and one year after fixing it up and painting it pink, a real estate agent representing the developer tried to buy it from her. “They said that they were acquiring the properties in light of a development. They came once, and I said I wasn’t interested. Then they came again, and I pretty much told them not to come back,” said Kelo.

Details and Allegations Surrounding the Susette Kelo v. City of New London Eminent Domain Case

New Movie Exposes Alleged Abuse of Power of Eminent Domain | Denver Eminent Domain and Condemnation Attorney

The following details and allegations were gathered in recent news reports:²

• Susette Kelo, a former paramedic, became the main plaintiff in the biggest eminent domain and condemnation case involving property rights in recent history.
• The case stemmed out of a comprehensive redevelopment plan by the city of New London, which called for the condemnation of many private homes.
• The city claimed it needed to vacate and bulldoze the neighborhood, so that it could bring in more tax revenue from the future development.
• Kelo and others sued the city of New London in the Supreme Court of Connecticut claiming it had abused its eminent domain power.
• The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.
• Eminent domain’s power come from the taking clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Many legal scholars were shocked that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city’s land grab, and ignoring the Constitution’s intended meaning and common sense.
• Kelo’s defeat only strengthened her resolve to fight back against what many believed was an injustice, and she spearheaded a nation-wide campaign to enact laws in all states to protect neighborhoods like hers’ from allegedly abusive eminent domain powers and activist courts.
• In Colorado, the Kelo Law is not as strong in its powers as in other states, and only earned a grade of “C” from the Institute for Justice.

What Are Colorado’s Eminent Domain Laws?

Here are some of Colorado’s eminent domain laws broken down that are found in Title 38 of the Colorado revised statutes (C.R.S. 38-1-101).

• The condemning authority must act in good faith for the purpose of taking property for a public purpose.
• The property owner must be offered or given fair compensation after due process. The fair market value is determined by a commission made up of impartial landowners or jury at the landowner’s discretion.
• The condemning authorities must issue a notice of intent before starting a condemnation lawsuit.
• If the estimated value of the land is valued at more than $5,000, the landowner can request an appraisal be conducted at the condemning authorities expense. The landowner has 90 days to request such an appraisal.
• After reviewing the appraisals, and if no negotiation can be reached, then the condemning authority must issue a final offer.
• If no settlement is reached, the condemning authority must subpoena the landowner and file a complaint in court.
• The landowner has the right to choose a jury of his/her peers, or a commission of impartial landowners to come up with a land value suitable for the landowner.
• The landowner and their attorney are allowed to view discovery and summons witnesses before trial.

Contact a Denver Eminent Domain and Condemnation Attorney at Downey & Associates, PC

If you have been offered money for your property, because a condemning authority plans to build over it, you should retain the help of an experienced Denver Eminent Domain and Condemnation Attorney with Downey & Associates, PC. If the condemning authority’s plans are for anything other than a public use, then we can help you get the justice you deserve. For a free, initial consultation, call us today at 303-813-1111 or send us an e-mail.

_________________________________________________________________

¹“This Woman’s ‘Little Pink House’ Was Taken Away by The Government” published in NBC’s Nightly News, April 2018.

²“New film shows eminent domain gone wrong” published in the Denver Post, May 2018.

Practice Areas

Downey & Associates, PC
7293 South Yampa Street, Suite 100
Foxfield, CO 80016
Map and Directions

Phone 303-813-1111
Fax 303-813-1122
E-mail

• Home
• Firm Overview
• Attorneys
• Practice Areas
• Resources
• Blog
• Contact Us
• Disclaimer
• HTML Sitemap
• XML Sitemap