ET-Petition-Prop-fillable.pdf
Henkel Corporation, Petitioner Vs. City Of Warren, Respondent · 25-002423-TT
Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 _____________________________, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioner(s) v MTT Docket No. _____________________________, Respondent(s) ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 1. Property Parcel No: _____________________________________________ (If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 2. The property identified above is ___real ___personal. 3. If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties contiguous? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- contiguous parcel.) 4. Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property under appeal? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under appeal.) 5. If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 6. The property identified above is classified as _________________________ 7. If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made to Respondent’s ___ March ___ July ___December Board of Review. HENKEL CORPORATION 12-13-28-300-015 X X N/A INDUSTRIAL-IMPROVED
Page 2
MTT Docket No. _________________ Page 2 of 4 8. If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 9. If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 10. The property or properties at issue are located in _______________County. The property or properties’ address is: 11. The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable local governmental unit): ________________________________________ 12. Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 13. This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): ________the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values ________the property or properties’ taxable value only If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? ___ Yes ___No ________uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment ________the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation under MCL ______ 14. The tax year(s) at issue are: _______________________________________ According to the assessor's office, complex commercial properties, like the subject, are typically referred to the Michigan Tax Tribunal from the Board Of Review. N/A Macomb 23343 SHERWOOD, Warren, MI 48091 City of Warren One Henkel Way, Rocky Hill, CT 06067 X 2025
Page 3
MTT Docket No. _________________ Page 3 of 4 15. If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the prior tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 16. The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s Board of Review are: Tax Year True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value 17. Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: Tax Year True Cash Value State Equalized Value Taxable Value 18. The values in dispute for the property identified above are: Tax Year True Cash Value State Equalized Value Taxable Value 19. Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 20. List the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to support the relief requested (attach additional page if necessary): N/A 2025 7,483,420 3,741,710 2,208,263 2025 6,188,608 3,094,304 1,826,180 2025 1,294,812 647,406 382,083 True Cash Value to be reduced to $6,188,608, and State Equalized Value reduced to $3,094,304. The subject property is over valued. A cost approach based on the Marshall & Swift handbook supports a reduction in the subject's assessment. Recent nearby sales of similar properties supports a reduction in the subject's assessment. An Income Approach supports a reduction in the subject's assessment.
Page 4
MTT Docket No. _________________ Page 4 of 4 Signature of Petitioner’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: ______________________________________________________________________ Printed Name of Petitioner’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: ______________________________________________________________________ Email Address: _________________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ Telephone Number: ________________________________________ Date: _________________________________________________________________ Jimmy Osborne Jimmy.Osborne@Crowe.com 320 E JEFFERSON BLVD. PO BOX 7, SOUTH BEND, IN 46624-007 346-308-8511 06/02/2025