A. General Procedure
A real estate tax abatement is defined as a reduction of, among other things, overvalued real estate tax. A taxpayer must apply for abatement for each specific year in which there is a dispute. An application cannot be filed on taxes from previous years. Abatement Applications must be filed after the third quarter tax bill is issued and no later than February 2, 2004. In addition to an Abatement Application, the taxpayer must also file an Information Requisition Form. The Information Requisition Form solicits information in determining whether abatement is warranted. A signed Information Requisition Form is due no later than 30 days from the date on which the Abatement Application is received.
 
The Abatement Application must be filed with the Assessing Department prior to the close of business on February 2, 2004. If the taxpayer mails in an application, the taxpayer is strongly urged to allow sufficient time for the application to reach the Assessing Department before the filing deadline. Please be advised that abatement shall not be granted unless the application is filed on time.
 
Although the taxpayer may opt to apply for an abatement of tax, the full tax due must be paid by the due date (February 1, unless the that day falls on a weekend) in order to avoid interest charges. Interest will be due if the payment is received late. If the total tax on real estate exceeds $3,000.00, the tax must be paid by the due date in order to preserve the right to appeal an abatement decision rendered by the Assessing Department to the Appellate Tax Board.
 
The Assessing Department is authorized by law to request information from the taxpayer that may be necessary to properly determine the fair market value of the premises. To preserve the taxpayer's right to appeal an abatement decision to the Appellate Tax Board, such taxpayer must provide all information requested by the Assessing Department. Failure to respond to an information request within thirty days of the date on which the application for abatement was filed will result in a denial of the application and may bar an appeal to the Appellate Tax Board.
 
The Assessing Department attempts to process all abatement applications within three months of filing. The taxpayer will be informed of the status of the application through one of the following notices:
 
Notice of Approval - The Assessing Department will abate the amount specified in the Notice of Approval. If the tax has been paid, the City will reimburse the taxpayer; or
 
Notice of Denial - No abatement will be granted. A denial will be issued in cases where the Assessing Department has made a decision based upon the merits of the abatement application.
 
B. Standing
In addition to the above-described procedure, it is necessary to determine whether the taxpayer will have standing to file an application for abatement. Under the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws c. 59 §59, "if a person other than the person to whom a tax on real estate is assessed is the owner thereof, or has an interest therein, or is in possession thereof, and pays the tax, he may thereafter prosecute in his own name any application, appeal or action provided by law for the abatement or recovery of such tax, which after payment thereof shall be deemed for the purposes of such application, appeal or action, to have been assessed to the person so paying the same." Based upon the foregoing statutory language, the taxpayer will have standing to file an application for abatement if such taxpayer, other than the assessed owner, is the "owner" of or is in "possession" of the premises and has paid the real estate taxes affecting such premises. In proving the taxpayer's "ownership" of the premises and payment of real estate taxes, a taxpayer may, for example, provide a copy of the declaration of trust establishing a trust in the event that the premises was conveyed into a trust and provide copies of signed checks used to make real estate tax payments. In order to maintain a level of privacy with respect to the acquisition of the premises, however, the taxpayer does not have to provide a copy of the schedule of beneficial interests unless the Assessing Department specifically requests such document from the taxpayer. In the event that the taxpayer's "ownership" of the premises is not proven by such documentation, the taxpayer may prove "possession" of the premises by providing copies of his photo identification bearing the address of the premises (e.g., drivers license) as well as a copy of his homeowner's policy insuring the premises. Although the foregoing documentation should be sufficient for application for abatement purposes, the Assessing Department will notify the taxpayer promptly should any questions remain regarding his interest in the premises.
 
C. Appeal
If the taxpayer is dissatisfied with the decision of the Assessing Department or dissatisfied with the amount of abatement granted, the taxpayer may file an appeal to the Appellate Tax Board. Such appeal must be filed within three months of the date on which the Assessing Department rendered its decision to either grant or deny an abatement.
 
D. Criteria
Finally, among the factors that the Assessing Department may likely consider in determining whether an abatement of tax is warranted is whether the existing classification of the premises is appropriate for valuation purposes. For example, in the event the premises are vacant, the assessed valuation of the premises should, arguably, be classified as "open" as opposed to "residential" which would be assessed, rated and taxed differently from the other classes but proportionately in the same class. In the event that the taxpayer's application for abatement is denied and thereafter appealed to the Appellate Tax Board, the taxpayer will bear the burden of showing that the premises is overvalued and the Appellate Tax Board may presume the validity of the valuation unless the taxpayer has sustained the burden of proving the contrary. General Electric Co. v. Board of Assessors of Lynn, 393 Mass. 591, 599 (1984). Should the Appellate Tax Board find no credible or persuasive evidence that the premises has a lower value than that assessed, the Appellate Tax Board will likely conclude that the taxpayer has not sustained the burden of proof. General Electric Co., 393 Mass. at 599. In the taxpayer's effort to provide credible evidence, the taxpayer has the option of introducing expert testimony regarding the use of three valuation methods that are typically relied upon to generate a value for the premises. Id. at 608. The three alternative valuation approaches consist of the replacement cost, market and capitalization of income methods. Id.