Is it possible .....

[Austin]

John:
If you reassess every year using sales from the previous year as a reference, then what do you mean the standard is + or – 10% of MV? Does that mean your model equation has to predict the actual sale prices within + or – 10% of what they actually sold for? The reason I ask is that what a property sells for is not by definition the appraised MV of that property so how can assessors say the assessed value has anything to do with MV? Isn’t that misleading? Then too, the appraised MV’s can’t match your standard, so how can your standard be higher thaan the standard of appraised MV derived by using much stricter methods and standards of appraisal?

 

[Terry Russell]

I believe he just asked if it were posisble that the assessed market value for taxation could be more than an appraised value.
And Austin you asked what does the assessed value have to do with the MV?
There could be an assessed taxable market value, an appraised taxable market value and a standard market value. They are all related estimates of MV. duh?
Then you say how can an assessed value be higher than an appraised MV under USPAP.
Why couldn't it. Just because the methodology does not fall under the same umbrella of regulation, has absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the final MV.
terry

 

[Austin]

Atc:
Will you please cite that universal, omnipresent, and ubiquitous definition of MV you are throwing around? I would love to hear it. Duh? Further, I did not say an assessed value could not be higher than an appraised value under USPAP. Based on the formula John cited, depending on the market trend it could be more or less like + or -10% by his own standard. Depending on the definition of MV it could be a lot more or less.
How can you have related estimates of MV with three different definitions of MV? How are they related? Words mean things atc. If scope of appraisal, definition of MV, and methodology does not affect the estimate of MV, then what is the core issue of USPAP 2003? Ever heard of purpose, intended use, intended & unintended users or maybe even scope of appraisal? Ever heard of not creating a misleading estimate of value? If calling something MV when it is not MV in the context that most people think it is, then what could be more misleading. If all of your definitions of MV mean the same thing, then why do you have three different names for them? Duh?

 

[Terry Russell]

Ok the duh? was out of place.

How are they related?

It is the SAME subject, parcel, unit whatever you want to call it 123 anywhere usa. A single entity. Identical to all estimates of MV. And you were the one throwing the MV around not me.
That was all I meant, that the same subject could have numerous valuation techniques applied and be supportive or nonsupportive to whatever the assignment calls for. enuf I need to bone up on this stuff.
terry