- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Court unanimously rules against homeowners seeking fair market value after tax sale
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:29 am
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:29 am
LINK
(The Center Square) – In a 9-0 decision Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled a Michigan family was not entitled to compensation based on the fair market value of a home sold in a tax foreclosure, saying such a requirement would impose “unprecedented burdens” on both local governments and taxpayers.
“Under Pung’s rule, a tax sale would often net the government a loss, paid out to the delinquent taxpayer himself, rendering tax sales infeasible as a debt-collection mechanism,” according to the court’s summary of the case.
In 2012, the Pung family of Isabella County, Michigan, owed about $2,200 in property taxes – an amount Micahel Pung disputed and his attorneys said was “improperly imposed.”
The county seized the home anyway to recoup the disputed debt, selling it at public auction for about $76,000, despite the property having an estimated fair market value of roughly $194,000.
(The Center Square) – In a 9-0 decision Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled a Michigan family was not entitled to compensation based on the fair market value of a home sold in a tax foreclosure, saying such a requirement would impose “unprecedented burdens” on both local governments and taxpayers.
“Under Pung’s rule, a tax sale would often net the government a loss, paid out to the delinquent taxpayer himself, rendering tax sales infeasible as a debt-collection mechanism,” according to the court’s summary of the case.
In 2012, the Pung family of Isabella County, Michigan, owed about $2,200 in property taxes – an amount Micahel Pung disputed and his attorneys said was “improperly imposed.”
The county seized the home anyway to recoup the disputed debt, selling it at public auction for about $76,000, despite the property having an estimated fair market value of roughly $194,000.
12
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:31 am to Eurocat
That makes no sense at all. Why would he let his house be taken over a $2,200 tax bill?
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:32 am to Eurocat
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:34 am to Eurocat
You don’t actually own your property.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:35 am to Eurocat
I think the SCOTUS decision is the correct one, however, this is a case of “bad facts make bad law”.
The real contention by the homeowner wasn’t that auction prices aren’t “fair market value”, it’s that the local government purposely manipulated the auction to result in a lower selling price to screw over the homeowner.
That issue was not debated by SCOTUS and was left to the lower courts to decide. I am really curious to see how that side of the argument shakes out. If lower courts find that the local government purposely manipulated the auction process, and the case matriculates back up to SCOTUS on appeals, we could end up with a much more interesting ruling with regards to how tax auctions must be conducted in order to ensure homeowners get “fair market value” vs corrupt practices to facilitate redistributing property to connected cronies at a discount.
The real contention by the homeowner wasn’t that auction prices aren’t “fair market value”, it’s that the local government purposely manipulated the auction to result in a lower selling price to screw over the homeowner.
That issue was not debated by SCOTUS and was left to the lower courts to decide. I am really curious to see how that side of the argument shakes out. If lower courts find that the local government purposely manipulated the auction process, and the case matriculates back up to SCOTUS on appeals, we could end up with a much more interesting ruling with regards to how tax auctions must be conducted in order to ensure homeowners get “fair market value” vs corrupt practices to facilitate redistributing property to connected cronies at a discount.
This post was edited on 6/25/26 at 10:38 am
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:38 am to TrueTiger
quote:
You don’t actually own your property.
This is a very uncomfortable truth in a country founded on the most basic rights to life, liberty, and property.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:38 am to Eurocat
quote:
The county seized the home anyway to recoup the disputed debt, selling it at public auction for about $76,000, despite the property having an estimated fair market value of roughly $194,000.
the actual value of a property is what someone is willing to pay for it, not the estimated value....
also, he could have out bid on the property and been out the owed property taxes and auction fees. but not the full value he lost doing nothing.......
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:39 am to Eurocat
Damn guy has to feel like a clown. Lost the house over 2k and then his facts were so bad the 3 room temp iq justices sided against him and with people they hate.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:44 am to Eurocat
You aren’t the home owner if your house was foreclosed on.
Idiot.
Idiot.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:45 am to Eurocat
quote:
selling it at public auction for about $76,000, despite the property having an estimated fair market value of roughly $194,000.
So the new owner's property tax liability is based on a $76,000 property, right?
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:46 am to BuckeyeGoon
It should be but you know the gov isn’t going to do that.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 10:51 am to timdonaghyswhistle
quote:
You aren’t the home owner if your house was foreclosed on.
Idiot.
Easy, big fella. If I have completely paid off the mortgage on my home and land, would you call me the homeowner?
Now, once this occurs, but I don’t pay these arbitrary property taxes, will the government foreclose and confiscate my home and land?
So, am I really the homeowner?
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:00 am to TrueTiger
quote:
You don’t actually own your property.
This is true for a lot of things. You start a business with loans. The bank owns it.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:05 am to kingbob
quote:
I think the SCOTUS decision is the correct one, however, this is a case of “bad facts make bad law”. The real contention by the homeowner wasn’t that auction prices aren’t “fair market value”, it’s that the local government purposely manipulated the auction to result in a lower selling price to screw over the homeowner. That issue was not debated by SCOTUS and was left to the lower courts to decide. I am really curious to see how that side of the argument shakes out. If lower courts find that the local government purposely manipulated the auction process, and the case matriculates back up to SCOTUS on appeals, we could end up with a much more interesting ruling with regards to how tax auctions must be conducted in order to ensure homeowners get “fair market value” vs corrupt practices to facilitate redistributing property to connected cronies at a discount.
This here s why I cut out energy drinks so I could afford the TD premium subscription.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:07 am to High C
quote:
Now, once this occurs, but I don’t pay these arbitrary property taxes, will the government foreclose and confiscate my home and land?
So, am I really the homeowner?
In Louisiana you have a redemption period of 3 years if it's not an abandoned or blighted property. Also don't forget your homestead exemption.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:08 am to Rex Feral
Guess he showed them
This post was edited on 6/25/26 at 11:08 am
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:17 am to BuckeyeGoon
I have successfully protested my AV on newly purchased homes multiple times based upon what I actually paid. Don't know if their system works the same as it does in Texas.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:23 am to Eurocat
The idea you can never own anything in this country due to property tax is asinine.
One must pay the government annually to have the honor of living in your own house. Property tax should be scrubbed from the books as a way to steal from the people.
One must pay the government annually to have the honor of living in your own house. Property tax should be scrubbed from the books as a way to steal from the people.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:25 am to dgnx6
quote:
In Louisiana you have a redemption period of 3 years if it's not an abandoned or blighted property. Also don't forget your homestead exemption.
Yes, but homestead exemption is a pretty low bar these days. The 3 year redemption period seems generous, but if you don’t pay by the end of the 3 years, they’re still going to take your home/property.
Posted on 6/25/26 at 11:25 am to CDawson
Yep, property tax shouldn’t exist. Especially considering the outright fraud the other taxes we pay are spent on.
Though the rates are far too high one can at least justify the income and sales tax rules.
Though the rates are far too high one can at least justify the income and sales tax rules.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News