26-002431 Fackert Answer Explanation and Docs.pdf

Rhonda L Fackert Petitioner V Township Of Green Oak Respondent · 26-002431-TT

← View full record

Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.

GREEN DAK CHARTER TOW Sip 

0001 SILVER LAKE ROAD, BRIGHTON, yy gg), 

puone: 810-231-1333 = 

FAX 810-231 50 

July 7, 2026 

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

Via MTT E-File 

611 W. Ottawa St 

Lansing, MI 48933 

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Rhonda L Fackert v. Township of Green Oak 

Supporting Documents to Respondent Answer 

Please see attachments to Respondent Answer to subject appeal. 

ATTACHED DOCUMENTS: 

e 

Respondent Explanation SC Answer to Uncapping 

e 

2026 Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation and Property Classification, form L-4400/1019 

eo 

2026 Record Card 

e 

2026 Sketch 

e 

2026 Valuation Disclosure 

e 

2026 March Board of Review Appeal 

e 

Property Transfer Affidavit L-4260 

e 

Warranty Deed 2025R-009793 

e 

Limited Liability Company Certificate/Statement/Articles 

e 

Michigan Revenue Administrative Bulletin 1989-48 

e 

General Property Tax Act Excerpt, MCL 211.27a 

e 

TRJ &E Properties, LLC v City of Lansing, 323 Mich App 664; 919 NW2d 795 (2018). 

e 

C&JInvestments of Grayling, LLC 

v City of Grayling, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Michigan Court 

of Appeals, issued November 13, 2007 (Docket No. 270989) 

Proof of Service mailed separately. 

| can be reached at 810-231-1333 ext 105 or by email at christina.yaeger@greenoaktwp.com, 

if you have any 

questions. 

Regards,

Rhonda L Fackert v Township of Green Oak 

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Respondent Explanation SC Answer to Uncapping 

Issue Presented 

The issue on appeal is whether the transfer of the subject property from James H. Fackert, Sr. 

and Rhonda L. Fackert to 10685 McCabe Rd. LLC qualifies for the commonly controlled entity 

exemption from transfer of ownership under MCL 211.27a(7)(m). 

Respondents’ Position 

Respondent received a Property Transfer Affidavit, dated May 7, 2025, reporting the transfer of 

the subject property from James H. Fackert, Sr. and Rhonda L. Fackert to 10685 McCabe Rd. 

LLC. During its review, Respondent determined that Rhonda L. Fackert is the sole member and 

owner of 10685 McCabe Rd. LLC. 

Prior to the transfer, title to the subject property was held jointly by James H. Fackert, Sr. and 

Rhonda L. Fackert. Following the transfer, title to the property was vested in 10685 McCabe Rd. 

LLC, whose sole member and owner is Rhonda L. Fackert. Accordingly, James H. Fackert, Sr., 

retained no ownership interest or control interest in the transferee entity. 

Petitioner contends that the transfer qualifies for exemption from uncapping under MCL 

211.27a(7)(m) because the transferors and transferee are commonly controlled. Respondent 

disagrees. 

MCL 211.27a(7)(m) provides an exemption from transfer of ownership for certain transfers 

among legal entities that are commonly controlled. The statute does not define the term 

“commonly controlled.” The Michigan Court of Appeals has recognized that the statutory 

language controls the analysis and that administrative guidance cannot expand or alter the 

language enacted by the Legislature. TRJ & E Properties, LLC v City of Lansing, 323 Mich App 

664; 919 NW2d 795 (2018). 

Michigan Revenue Administrative Bulletin 1989-48 is not binding law; however, it reflects the 

Michigan Department of Treasury’s longstanding interpretation of the commonly controlled 

entity exemption and provides persuasive guidance when applying MCL 211.27a(7)(m). The 

State Tax Commission has relied upon Revenue Administrative Bulletin 1989-48 when 

determining whether entities are commonly controlled. See C & J Investments of Grayling, LLC 

v City of Grayling, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued

Rhonda L Fackert v Township of Green Oak 

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Respondent Explanation SC Answer to Uncapping 

Applying the statute and the Department or Treasury’s interpretive guidance, this transfer does 

not qualify for the exemption. Before the transfer, 

James H. Fackert, Sr. and Rhonda L. Fackert 

each held an ownership interest in the subject property. After the transfer, Rhonda L. Fackert 

became the sole member and owner of 10685 McCabe Rd. LLC, while James H. Fackert, Sr. 

retained no ownership interest or control in the transferee entity. Therefore, the ownership 

interests held before and after the transfer are not identical. 

The fact that James H. Fackert, Sr. and Rhonda L. Fackert are married does not change the 

ownership interests created by the transaction. Prior to the transfer, the property was owned 

jointly by both individuals. Following the transfer, the property was owned by an entity in which 

only Rhonda L. Fackert held a membership interest. The marital relationship between the 

transferors does not preserve James H. Fackert, Sr.’s ownership interest or create an ownership 

interest in 10685 McCabe Rd. LLC where none exists. 

Petitioner’s argument conflates control of the transferee entity with preservation of the 

ownership interests existing before the transfer. Although Rhonda L. Fackert continued to 

control the property through 10685 McCabe Rd. LLC, the transfer did not merely change the 

form of ownership. Instead, it eliminated James H. Fackert, Sr.’s ownership interest in the 

property without providing him with a corresponding interest in the transferee entity. 

Respondent is not asserting that transfers from individuals to limited liability companies can 

never qualify for the commonly controlled entity exemption. Rather, the exemption applies when 

the requirements of MCL 211.27a(7)(m) are satisfied. Here, the ownership interests associated 

with the property were not preserved following the transfer. 

As the party seeking application of an exemption from uncapping, Petitioner bears the burden of 

demonstrating that the requirements for the exemption have been satisfied. Common control 

alone does not establish entitlement to the exemption where the ownership interests held before 

and after the transfer are not the same. Because James H. Fackert, St. retained no ownership 

interest or control in 10685 McCabe Rd. LLC, Petitioner has not established that the transfer 

qualifies for exemption under MCL 211.27a(7)(m). 

Conclusion 

Accordingly, the transfer from James H. Fackert, Sr. and Rhonda L. Fackert to 10685 McCabe

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

A 

em Toma, 

THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL 

L-4400 

Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification 

1994 

This form is issued under the authority of Public Act 206 of 1893, Sec. 211.24¢ and Sec.211.34c, as amended. This is a model assessment notice to be used by the local assessor. 

FROM 

PARCEL IDENTIFICATION 

GREEN OAK CHARTER TOWNSHIP 

PARCEL NUMBER: 

4716-16-200-010 

CHRISTINA YAEGER, ASSESSOR 

PROPERTY ADDRESS. 

OFFICE OF THE ASSESSOR 

i 

10001 SILVER LAKE ROAD 

10685 MCCABE RD 

BRIGHTON, MI 48116 

BRIGHTON, MI 48116 

SCHOOL DISTRICT CODE: 

47010 

OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS/PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL: 

EXEMPTIONS 

1894 

% Exempt As "Homeowners Principal Resldence™ 

0% 

Ax AH *AXSAAUTO*+5-DIGIT 48116 

T4 

P1 

#44 

% Exempt As "Qualified Agricultural Property™ 

0% 

Toe ie Rp 

LIC 

% Exempt 

As "MBT Industrial Personal”: 

0% 

BRIGHTON, 

MI 48116-8563 

% Exempt As "MBT Commercial Personal”: 

0% 

pets 

Ast 

als gggbggBog hogy peggy 

Exempt 

As "Disabled Veteran or 

[J Yes 

No 

Surviving Spouse”: 

Exempt As "Qualified Forest Property” 

 [] Yes 

No 

Exempt 

As "Development Property": 

[Yes 

No 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 

SEC 16, TIN, R6E BEG N 1/4 COR TH N 87*17'53" E 680.07 FT TH S 02*47'568" E 1324.60 FT TH S 87*11'30" W 669.09 FT TH N 

03*16'27" W 1325.90 FT TO POB CONT 20.5226 ACRES. SPLIT 4/95 FROM 16-16-200-003. 

ACCORDING TO MCL 211.34c THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED AS: 

401 

Residential 

PRIOR YEAR'S CLASSIFICATION 

401 

Residential 

The change in taxable value will increase/decrease 

CHANGE FROM 

your tax bill for the 2026 year by approximately: 

$3326 

PRIOR all 

AMOUNTVERR: 

PRIORYEARTO 

1. TAXABLE VALUE: 

138,789 

215,600 

76,811 

2. ASSESSED VALUE: 

199,000 

215,600 

16,600 

3. TENTATIVE EQUALIZATION FACTOR: 

1.000 

4. STATE EQUALIZED VALUE (SEV): 

199,000 

215,600] 

16,600 

5. WAS THERE A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP IN 2025 THAT RESULTED IN A TAXABLE VALUE UNCAPPING? 

[X]Yes 

[] No 

6. Assessor Change Reason(s): 

Market Adjustment 

=) SE 

Reprint 7/7/2026 

Original Print Mail Date 2/17/2026 

The 2026 Inflation rate Multiplier is: 1.027 

Questions regarding the Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification may be directed to the Following: 

Name: 

Telephone Number: 

Email Address: 

CHRISTINA YAEGER 

(810) 231-1333 

5 

christina.yaeger@greenoaktwp.com 

March Board of Review Appeal Information. The Board of Review will meet at the following dates and times: 

MONDAY, MARCH 9,2026, FROM 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM

5/2902 821 

1000°£8T 

00518 

100S°S0T 

| 

€202 

2919 pET 

| 

100% 

¥6T 

006°£8 

1005 ‘90T 

202 

S068. 8¢€T 

| 

1000661 

00T‘/8 

1006 ‘TTT 

$207 

W D¥d/X3dY /T0Z//T/¥0 

9S 

©n009'5T2 

W009 STZ 

1009°STZ 

00816 

1008 €2T 

920Z 

__3BYM 

usym 

oym 

5 

an|eA 

J9y10 

M3 LADY 

| anlea 

ELTRIN 

anjeA 

2 oLqexer 

|/leungLJdl 

[40 pJeog 

passassy 

buLp| Lng 

pue] 

JBIA 

uteld pool 

po 

pue|3em 

El 

[uLARY 

[5] 

RUT ERERE:IY 

8 

puod 

papoom 

jm 

dwems 

= 

padedspue 

yb LH 

| 

mo 

burl oy 

[9A 

| 

| 

211s 

40 AydeuabodoL 

*s| Lan punoubaspun 

| 

S9L3ILLLIN pJepuels 

| 

| 

saybL1 393.41S 

| 

| 

quand 

| 

pind 

| SE9°T 

= 3N|BA Ysed anJl siuswdAosdwI pue] palewlls3 

[eloL 

| 

Sed 

. 

= 

2 

LE 

. 

| 

Jamas 

-002-9T- 

| SE9°T 

[37% 

96 

58°/¢€ 

918J40U0D/dwedd 

POOM 

:pays 

J91em 

00z HA

an[eA ysed 

pood % °ZLS 

?1ey 

uoLadLudsaa 

HL 13 60

S®3eWL1S3 3S0D JudwenoJdul pued 

JLeMapLs 

2.8 

u8S. 

go pride 

NH

679 LT 

= ®n|eA pue] 

"1s3 

|eloL 

S9J4DV 

[BIOL 75°07 

peOY 

[9ARUD 

86¢'8T 

SANVILIM 

 000°0T 

 6ET'9Z S®42V 000° Z0 

FDVIUOV NOLHOINE 

peoy 1.La 

TSE'62¢ 

000°0Q0T 

+96 ‘9T SDV 07S" €T 

IDVIYIV NOLHOITYE 

NBA 

uosedy 

~[pvy ®1e¥ 

yadeg 

2uoud 

yadsag 

obeIuoud 

uoradLadsag 

sauswaAoLdwT 

. 

x S4012B4 

oLLqnd 

| 

S9_NOLHOT¥E 66/% 66/y 

9 JBL PUueT JO SIIBWLISI SN|BA pue] 

aueden| 

| 

panoudur| x 

[ 

| 

| 

| 

SS°SvZ 

:vd4l/ADL /8T'Tey ADL 1S3 

9202 

| 

vea 

! 

%0 

 "3°¥'d 

| 

STOOHDS V3¥V NOLHOI¥E 

:]|00Yyds 

{ 

sniels 

Jaquin 

91eq 

| 

(s)2LwJdd bBuLp|Lng 

JY 

:BULUOZ OYIWI-TVIINIQISIY 

:SSB[D 

| 

Q3I4I¥3IA LON 

| 

¥3IHL0/A3SN LON-TZ 

20! 9002/21/2T 

0 

| 

V_NVW¥IH 

00°00T | ¥34SNVIL AL¥3dO¥d 

| 

HLON3T S,WdV-£0 

vid! 

0T0Z/€T/Z0 

1000°002 

|__VANOHY 

® SIWVL 

‘L

Q33a 

/08T00-¥+202 

31V1S3 3411-81 

¥202/T0/20 

T 

|OHY 

® ¥S 

H SIWVL 

‘L

00T 

a33a 

€6/600-45202! 

¥3IHL0/A3SN LON-TZ 

§202/20/50 

T 

D711 

‘ay 39VODW 

“sued 

Ag 

obed 

® 

| 

°21eq 

9d Lud 

| 

*1udud 

PILLLJBA 

JaqLT) 

9|eS 10 swJal 

ales 

aes 

| 

9

9202/20/20 

uo paluLid 

UO1SBULALT 

:A3UN0D 

 JIHSNMOL ¥IL¥VHD NVO NIFWD 

 :uOLIDLpSLINC

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

+P91uUBJENB 10U ING D[GeL|

i 

1SwelI wns dwn: 

d13des +129 0007) 

| 

£06 ‘TST 

ADL <= €60°T 

(0/6T 3¥d 

- 9%W NOLHOINE) 

403 

513des 

(ed Q00T T 

| 

HER 

: 

-sa30N 

(om Joyem 

T ________

Sb 99T 

181267 

is|el0L 

J3M3S DLLgNd| 

1J0ddns 

‘ 

‘ 

J91BM 

DLignd| 

vsL'e 

£09 

T 

AJ03s T Joruo1X3 

| 

MILLAR] 

(v) sdoog 

sede|dadia| 

__ 

43MIS/Jd31EM (4) 

4s 

4

. 

. 

| 

ues UIA 

(8) 

sdooa 

$S0°0T 

95621 

02Z 

(A103 RIESE BA03|V qNL DLWeJad 

ES 

| SULBM 

S| LL DLWEUID, 

| 

4S 

uoLl

UY'ST 

829°22 

099 

150) 9seg 

 J00|d ILL DLwedad 

| 

sLuLd 

(paysLuLiun) 

youl 

Zp 

:uoLlepunod 

BULPLS 

:J0LUDIXT 

D SSD 

Jamoys 

dlededsas 

Ystutd a

| 

sobeJed 

JULS BJ1X3 

400|4 

| 

t 

] 

6029 

880° TT 

I 

3993 007 ‘LL3M 

| 

A9LLOL BAIX3 

poom 

982'2 

T26'Y 

T 

IN 

- wa3sAs dLides 

burqun|d ON 

JoMRS/J31EM| 

 JEIH JIIBM JB|OS| 

*2U0D

enuew 

‘Jsauljos; 

i 

50 

; 

SIUAWASNLPY/SUCLILPPY JBYL0! 

t ony euros] 

| 

3201

yEL TET 

168827 

t[e30L 

| 

| 

J

80¢€ 

adeds 

|meJd 

BuLpLs 

A40as 

T 

Yyied aJmxid 

7; 

0-0 

is1sior

80¢€ 

aoeds 

|MeJD 

bulpls 

Ad03s 

zl 

yieg aJnixid 

€'T 

| 

070 

:sasLo

ud 

9Ty 

2uwss 

Yd Li 

Buipis 

1035 

7 (s)aumaxid sbedsnv| 

| 

150) 

"udsg 

MIN 1S0D 

9ZLS 

uoLlepunod 

J0LJ491X3 

saLJ03s| 

BuLqunld 

(£0 

| 

"4°S

seauv BuippLna) 

T 

lx] 

1 

"47S 9

PLL 

L 

Mod 

| 

any 

X 

| Auew 

| 

uoL

| 

95/00T/00T/00T/95=P0O0D % *quod/u0d3/dund/Aud-qv/Ayd. 

SI3LIN0 "9913 JO 

"ON 

TT

“4S 9G/T = ©aJV J00[4 

4S ZEQT 

= BAJY punodn 

TT 

ToT 

| 

S310NQ /M JLV pIdJod 

:waisAs BuriesH 

(TT) _utW 

| "pda 

X 

x3 

: 

i 

S94niXiL4 

JO 

|BnD/*ON 

| 

i 

¥S8T 318 

J 

sid 

A¥OLS 

Zz 

Ajtweg 

39jbuis 

TT 

:6pjg 

"s8y JOS 

"153 1S0D 

> 

= 

L 

7 

B

| 

TN 

wa1SAS A1LJndas: 

tales sduv 

0 

i 

€06°T8T 

:'A'D"L poilewLls3 

WNNDBA 

[BJluad 

2141293 

(ZT) 

| 

Le 

FEV 340dued 

€60°T 

X 

SZ¥‘99T 

:150D udea 

[ejol| 

J03dedWOD YSeJL 

3oeUINd poom. 

| 

pa1

368.489 2UUSg 

“450g 

/8T‘/67 

MON 9seg 

|el0L 

. 

eunes 

aly |BauaD 

| 

p313dJ

C 

= 

1eaJV 

JOO 

abuey 

ues Dd 

}[3S 

pe 

I 

0 

:400[4 

*DUOD ON: 

. 

- 

se 

(aby 

asia 

2buey Paepueae] 

Butjood/buLiesH oN 

OTE eon a 

Ses 

onemoss 

tn 

| 

dung won 

3M 

[p

: 

| 

For 

— 

usng. 

| 

L00D ® 1AM paduod| 

jews) 

099 1EeuV) 

(BO PRRUSATAS0 

| gnucided tzzmdec) 

| 

9dRUING JOOL4/LLBM 

| 

s335

0 

:S400Q 

"YooW 

| 

AO1S poom 

qni 

Lzznder 

i 

J91edH 

3deds 

h 

0 

:SJ400a 

-03ny. 

| 

| 

YlJeoH pasted, 

| 

wodJa3UT 

| 

Cul 

| 

+5 

pousLuLdl 

101R[NdJLD 1BAH 

| 

| 

ABH [BM OLAID9(I] 

ie paysLuLd 

£4035 7 

qegadd 

POOH PaaudA 

| 

(joo|4-uL) Jueipey 

Uol1eJ

youl 

ZH :uorlepunod 

¢ qBjedd 

POOH pajuaAun, 

| 

. 

RO 

3Yoe19Q 

| [EM UOWWOD 

A403S 

T qegedd 

qnL 10H, 

auelpey 

“[1®d "233 

| OBL POOM 

i 

0 

:°UIA PU03S| 

| A4ols 

z Jordeixa 

ued 2usA 

PJBOQaSEE OL1393(3 

oaseld 

|X

0 USA YLIg 

| 

| A4oas 

T JordaaxaT 

Jo1eaH yres 

| 

438M 10H pIdJod 

| 

buipLs 

:uordeaxa; 

pepLsS omL 

| 

|esodsiq sbeques 

| 

SIINA /M ULV PIdUOd 

X 

| 

Bueydan

i 

J 

:sse[d 

| 

Peas swes/puz. 

JaysemysLa 

1.539nd O/M JLv pIdJod. 

BueyJIBA

i 

1A31oeaded Jed 

, A101s 

Zz JoLuaiur 

dol >00> 

| wes3is| 

[[eod 

 poom| 

| 

uoL

Lo 

ta|ing Jes. 

oo 

A103 

T JOLJSIUT] 

"MO[ |v ®duel|ddy] 

293 

[LO 

| 

ses x 

ybno

i 

abeaen 

(ZT) 

| S¥29a/sayduod 

(9T) 

sede (dads 

(ST) 

sut-a tng 

(ST) 

| 

Bur ood/BuLiesH 

(TT) 

i 

(*3u0d

9202/20/20 

uo palutdd 

0T0-002-9T-9TZ¥ 

:J3qunNN 

[ddJed

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

45 0°96 

0°CT X.0°8 

Qa3HS 

45 0°099 

A9VdVO aaHOV.I3a 

.0°0€ 

0°22 

9202/10/10 

uo paluLdd 

xxxPI91UBIENG 10U INQ D[qEL[

345 0'022 

d3OM 

02 

45 0°9T9 

Imenn/AIs z 

OPT 

0°92 

Js 0°'Ze8 

JwsdIN/AIS 2 

,0°9T 

45 0°80E 

ImeD/AIS T 

OPT 

0°22 

T 40 

T Bulp| Lng 

|BLIUSPLSAY 

0T0

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

07/07/2026 

valuation Report 

02:01 PM 

Assessment Roll: 

GREEN 

4716-16-200-010 

2026 

Est. T.C.V. 

10685 MCCABE 

RD, 

LLC 

Property Class: 

401 

10685 MCCABE 

RD 

Map 

#: 

GREEN 

OAK CHARTER TOWNSHIP 

BRIGHTON, 

MI 

48116 

Land value Estimates 

for Land Table 4799.4799 BRIGHTON M&B 

* Factors 

* 

Description 

Frontage 

Depth 

Front 

Depth 

Rate %Adj. 

Reason 

value 

BRIGHTON ACREAGE 

13.520 Acres 16,964 

100.000 

229,351 

BRIGHTON ACREAGE 

07.000 Acres 

26,139 

10.000 

WETLANDS 

18,298 

20.52 Total 

Acres 

Total 

Est. 

Land value 

= 

247,649 

Land Improvement Cost Estimates 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

% Good 

cash value 

shed: 

wood Frame/Concrete 

37.85 

96 

45 

1,635 

Total 

Estimated Land Improvements True Cash value 

= 

1,635 

Cost 

Est. 

for Res. 

Bldg: 

1 

single Family 

2 

STORY 

cls 

¢ 

Blt 1854 

(11) 

Heating System: 

Forced Air 

w/ Ducts 

Ground Area 

= 1032 

SF 

Floor Area 

= 1756 

SF. 

Phy/Ab.Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=56/100/100/100/56 

Building Areas 

Stories 

Exterior 

Foundation 

Size 

Cost New 

Depr. 

Cost 

2 Story 

Siding 

Mich. 

Bsmnt 

416 

2 story 

Siding 

Crawl 

Space 

308 

1 story 

Siding 

Craw] 

Space 

308 

Total: 

228,891 

131,734 

other Additions/Adjustments 

water/Sewer 

Septic System 

~- 

MI 

1 

4,921 

2,756 

well, 

200 

Feet 

1 

11,088 

6,209 

Garages 

Class: 

C Exterior: 

Siding 

Foundation: 

42 

Inch 

(Unfinished) 

Base Cost 

660 

27,628 

15,472 

Porches 

WGEP 

(1 Story) 

220 

17,956 

10,055 

Fireplaces 

Exterior 

1 Story 

1 

6,703 

3,754 

Totals: 

297,187 

166,425 

Notes: 

ECF (BRIGHTON M&B 

- 

PRE 1970) 1.093 => TCV: 

181,903 

2026 

Est. T.C.V. 

4716-16-200-010 

= 

431,187 

Est. 

TCV/Total 

Floor Area 

= 245.55

7.20 

MTT Dockepjo. 26-002431 

Michigan Department of Treasury 

618 (Rev. 12:25 

Petition to Board of Review 

L-4035 

This form is issued under the authority of P.A. 206 of 1893, as amended. Filing is voluntary, however you may not appeal to the Michigan Tax Tribunal 

unless you first protest to the Board of Review, except when the property is classified as commercial real, industrial real, or developmental real. You may 

not appeal property classification to the State Tax Commission unless you first protest to the Board of Review. 

TO BE COMPLETED BY OWNER OR OWNER'S AGENT 

Owner's Name (Please Print or Type) 

Petitioner's Name (If Other than Owner. Please Print or Type) 

} 

10685 MCCABE RD, LLC 

. 

Township or City 

B 

County 

L IVI N G 

T 

Year of Appeal 

GREEN OAK TOWNSHIP 

STON 

2026 

The undersigned protests the assessed value and/or the tentative taxable value and/or the property classification and/or the qualified agricultural property exemption of 

the following described property: 

Property Identified (Parcel cade required. Property address & legal description optional) 

: 

4716-16-200-010 

SEC 16, TIN, R6E BEG N 1/4 COR TH N 87*17'53" E 680.07 FT TH S 02*47'58" E 1324.60 

FT TH S 87*11'30" W 669.09 FT TH N 03*16'27" W 1325.90 FT TO POB CONT 20.5226 

10685 MCCABE RD 

ACRES. SPLIT 4/95 FROM 16-16-200-003. 

Protested Item 

[J Assessed Value 

(Tentative 

[1 Taxable Status 

[1 

Classification 

[I 

Qualifed Agricultural 

Taxable Value 

(exemption) 

N 

Property Exemption 

T 

2 

Complete this section Tor a protest of assessed value , including assessed value changes associated with exempt status and denied or late filed personal 

property forms. 

Assessed Amount 

. 

Owner's Estimate of True Cash Value (Market Value) 

215,600 

P30 580 

x 

3 

= B219K 

REASON: 

[0 

value of Losses 

[I 

Value of Additions 

[J 

Poverty Exemption 

X 

Uncapping % 

[Complete this section for a request to change the cl 

garding classification 

in accordance wi 

Michigan Compiled Laws. The Board of Review shall not be influenced by the effect that a particular classification has on that property's status as a homeowner's principal residence 

or qualified agricultural property. 

Classification of property on this year's assessment roll: 

) 

401 

Classification should be: (Please check one of the following) 

O 

Agricultural 

[I Industrial 

O Timber Cutover 

[J Utility (Personal Property Only) 

O ‘Commercial 

O Residential 

0 Developmental 

rpm 

BR 

If 

the assessor has denled or changed 

the percentage of the exemption from the 

18 mills of local school operating tax for qualified agricultural property, the owner may appeal 

this 

action to the March Board of Review. THE BOARD OF REVIEW HAS NO AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER OR ACT UPON THE EXEMPTION FROM THE 18 SCHOOL OPERATING 

MILLS FOR HOMEOWNER'S PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE PROPERTIES. 

Percent qualified agricultural exemption granted by assessor: (Enter 0 if exemption is denied) 

[Percent qualified agricultural exemption requested by Owner: {Enter 100 if full 

exemption requested) 

Tn 

Zi) 

| 

it 

i 

HH] 

State py for protest of assessed value and/or he “tentative taxable value and/or classification and/or qualified agricultural property exemption. 

Propudy tinea 

dpad 

Wife ley gong 

€o AC whe thee was Mo charg

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Form 618, Page 2 

FOR BOARD OF REVIEW USE ONLY 

INSTRUCTIONS: Incorporate a copy of this form and the assigned number in the Board of Review minutes. 

Bo “Number 

] 

Parcel Code 

Hod 2 

Cy 

4716-16-200-010 

Disposition by Board of Review. The Board of Review must state the reason for its action below. 

Kl 

Denied 

a 

Assessed Value Changed From: 

215,600 | 10; 

[ 

] 

Record of Vote - Board or three member committee 

of board 

he 

I) 

Chairperson: IX ves [0 

no RCL 

Member: 

BJ 

ves 

[ 

no 

ial 

Member: 

of ves 

[| ol 

Initials 

Initial 

‘Initials 

) 

/ 

Dy 

A 

, 

77 ef does 

pel 

Cwsist hte 

2 

© ye age 

(77 

Reason for Board Action: 

Dotwsnep tation pres « 

Assesced 

(I /: 20 

i 

if you disagree with the decision of the Board of Review regarding fentative assessed value, you may appeal that decision by filing a petition with the Michigan Tax Tribunal at 

PO Box 30232, Lansing, Mi 48909. Commercial Real, Industrial Real, Developmental Real, Commercial Personal, industrial Personal and Utility Personal Property may be 

appealed by May 31. Agricultural Real, Residential Real, Timber - Cutover Real, and Agricultural Personal Property may be appealed by July 31. The petition must be filed on 

la Michigan Tax Tribunal form or a form approved by the Michigan Tax Tribunal. Michigan Tax Tribunal forms are available at www. michigan.gov/taxtri 

. 

m 

Hl 

Disposition by Board of Review. The Board of Review must state the reason for its action below. 

Xl 

Denied 

O 

Tentative Taxable Value Changed From: 

215,600 

To: 

(See attached L-4035A) 

| 

Record of Vote - Board or three member committee of board. 

\ 

Chairperson: 

ves 

[] 

nolullde 

Member: 

ves 

[] 

no AT 

Member: 

[3 ves 

[] no 

Il 

Initials 

Initials 

Initials 

Reason for Board Action: 

Deter 

fo Hiehigars Te Torbinal Llacagyrag 

vere Ho 

If» 

“isagree with the decision of the Board of Review regarding tentative taxable value, you may appeal that decision by filing a petition with the Michigan Tax Tribunal at 

Pe 

30232, Lansing MI 48909. Commercial Real, Industrial Real, Developmental Real, Commercial Personal, Industrial Personal and Utility Personal Property may be 

lapie.i2d by May 31. Agricultural Real, Residential Real, Timber - Cutover Real, and Agricultural Personal Property may be appealed by July 31. The petition must be filed on 

a Michigan Tax Tribunal form or a form approved by the Michigan Tax Tribunal. Michigan Tax Tribunal forms are available at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. 

Disposition by Board of Review. The Board of Review must state the reason for its action below. 

| 

Denied 

Od 

Classification Changed From: 

401 

To: 

Record of Vote - Board or three member committee of board. 

Chairperson: [] Yes 

[J] No——— 

Member: 

[] Yes 

[J] No——— 

Member: 

[] ves 

[] NO 

ni 

Initials 

Initials 

Reason for Board Action: 

: 

N 

f you disagree with the decision of the Board of Review regarding classification, you may appeal by sending Form 2167 

to the State Tax Commission, PO Box 30471, 

Lansing Mi 48909, 

by June 30. 

. 

. 

Disposition by Board of Review. The Board of Review must state the reason for its action below. 

O 

Exemption Request Denied 

O 

Exemption percent modified from 

Ci 

% To: 

% 

Record of Vote - Board or three member committee of board. 

:

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Michigan Department of Treasury - 2766 (Rev. 03-25) 

L-4260 

P roperty Tra nsfer Affi davit 

This form is issued under authority of P.A. 415 of 1994. Filing 1s mandatory. 

This form must be filed whenever real estate or some types of personal property are transferred (even 

if you are not 

recording a deed), The completed Affidavit must be filed by the new owner with the assessor for the city or township 

where the property is located within 45 days of the transfer. The information on this form is NOT CONFIDENTIAL. 

1. 

Street Address of Property 

2, County 

3. Date of Transfer (or land contract signed) 

10685 McCabe Rd 

Livingston 

May 7, 2025 

4. Location of Real Estate (Check appropriate field and enter name in the space below.) 

5. Purchase Price of Real Estate 

Od City 

Xx Township 

OJ Village 

$1.00 

6. Seller's {Teansferor) Name 

Green Oak 

James H. Fackert, Sr & Rhonda L. Fackert 

7. Property Identification Number (PIN). If you don't have a PIN, attach legal description. 

8. Buyer's (Transferee) Name and Mailing Address 

BIN. This number ranges from 10 ta 25 digits. 

It usually includes hyphens and sometimes includes | 10685 McCabe Rd, LLC 

letters. It is found on the property tax bill and on the assessment notice. 

10555 McCabe Rd, Brighton, MI 48116 

9. Buyer's (Transferee) Telephone Number 

810-599-6418 

Items 10 - 15 are optional. However, by completing them you may avoid further correspondence. 

10. Type of Transfer. Transfers include, but are not limited to, deeds, fand contracts, transfers involving trusts or wills, certain long-term leases and business interest. 

See page 2 for list. 

J Land Contract 

OJ Lease 

O Deed 

O Other (specify) 

4716-16-200-010 

11, Was property purchased from 2 financial institution? | 12. Is the transfer between related persons? 

13, Amount of Down Payment 

J Yes 

OJ No 

7 Yes 

Na 

14. 

If you financed the purchase, did you pay market rate of interest? 

15. Amount Financed (Borrowed) 

OJ Yes 

O No 

EXEMPTIONS 

Certain transfers are exempt from uncapping. 

if you believe your transfer qualifies for an exemption, please indicate the type of exemption you're 

claiming below. Note that if an exemption is claimed, your assessor may request additional information to support your claim. 

Transfer from one spouse to the other spouse. 

0 Change in ownership solely to exclude or include a spouse. 

O Transfer between certain family members *(see page 2). Describe relationship from each Transferor to each Transferee, aitach additional 

page if necessary. Seller Name: 

Buyer Name: 

Relationship of Buyer to Seller: 

OJ Transfer of that portion of a property subject to a life lease or life estate (until the life lease or life estate expires). 

0 Transfer between certain family members of that portion 

of 

a property after the expiration or termination of 

a 

life estate or life lease 

retained by transferor ** (see page 2). Describe relationship from each Transferor to each Transferee, attach additional page 

if necessary, 

Seller Name: 

Buyer Name: 

Relationship of Buyer to Seller: 

O Transfer to effect the foreclosure or forfelture of real property. 

] Transfer by redemption from a tax sale. 

O Transfer into a trust where the settior or the settior's spouse conveys property to the trust and is also the sole beneficiary of the trust. 

Transfer resulting from a court order unless the order specifies a monetary payment, 

N Transfer creating or ending a joint tenancy if at least one person is an original owner of the property (or his/her spouse). 

0 Transfer to establish or release a security interest (collateral), 

0 Transfer of real estate through normal public trading of stock. 

DA 

transfer between entities under common control or among members of an affiliated group. YON 

ER Ear PA. Cages 

] Transfer resulting from transactions that qualify as a tax-free reorganization under Section 368 of the MATTER

/ 

records in this 255 TSB as stated. 

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

LIVINGSTON COUNTY TREASURER’S CERTIFICATE MN 

2025R-009793 

I hereby certify that there are no TAX LIENS OR TITLES 

, 

os 

215 FR 

oan03 PM 

held by the State or any individual against the within 

i 

/21/ 

> 

02:05: 

description, and all TAXES are same as paid for five years 

oy 

BRANDON DENBY 

previous to the date of this instrument or appear on the 

REGISTER OF DEEDS 

LIVINGSTON COUNTY, MI 48843 

2§ 

Jennifer M. Nash, Treasurer 

RECORDING: 26.00 

REMON: 4.00 

{ 

__2025 

Taxes not examined Certificate # S0A3D 

| 

PAGES: 1 

"77 Acting 

in the County of: 

Li 

WARRANTY DEED 

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: 

That James H. Fackert Sr. and Rhonda L. Fackert, husband and wife, whose 

address 

is 10555 McCabe Road, Brighton, Ml .48116, Conveys and Warrants to 10685 McCabe Road, LLC, which has a 

registered address of 10555 McCabe Road, Brighton, MI 48118, the following described premises situated in the Township 

of Green Oak, County of Livingston, and State of Michigan: 

: 

PARCELC: 

Part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 16, Town 

1 North, Range 6 East, Green 

Oak Township, Livingston County, Michigan. Beginning at the North Quarter corner of said Section 16; 

thence along the North line of said Section 16 North 87 degrees 17 minutes 53 seconds East 680.07 feet; 

thence South 02 degrees 47 minutes 58 seconds East 1324.60 feet; thence South 87 degrees 11 minutes 

30 seconds West 669.09 feet; thence North 03 degrees 16 minutes 27 seconds West 1325.90 feet to the 

point of beginning. 

Commonly known as: 10685 McCabe Road, Brighton, Ml 48116 

Parcel identification number: 4716-16-200-010 

Together with 

all 

and 

singular the tenements, 

hereditaments 

and appurtenances thereunto 

belonging 

or 

in anywise 

appertaining for the full consideration of One Dollar ($1.00). 

This instrument is exempt from the State Real Estate Transfer 

Tax under MCL 207.526(a) and the County Real Estate Transfer Tax under MCL 207.505(a). 

Subject to matters of record. This property may be located within the vicinity of farmland or a farm operation. Generally 

accepted agricultural and management practices which may generate noise, dust, odors, and other associated conditions 

may be used and are protected by the Michigan Right to Farm Act. 

Dated this 7th day of May, 2025 

Witnesses: 

(Ls) 

James H. Fackert Sr. 

QLorda 

f Fncbk 

s, 

Rhondg L. Fackert 

Jordan G fnglish 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

}ss. 

: 

COUNTY OF LIVINGSTON 

} 

: 

Rhongla BeSsley, Notary Public \ J 

State of Michigan, County of Oakland 

) 

My Commission Expire: 

cember 

5. 

20 

ng 

gli. 

Instrument 

Business 

Williams, Knack & Burrows Pt 

8c praasid

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

SHOAMEN LINdEOD 

5207 ‘Zz Aefy -aadayg 

Fa #op 

wy wonerf poo) ww fg papas og ap ‘

yrantagas oy pu “gmogfypisZy my pore wy Hwmucsy Apprcr pmery oy ai, s

preornnbgO Guypouofy) tmfuny Appoporsy Va Le 2) 2 wf, 707 t

70 ‘ory 

ply po pn sep op 9 pool gees yo 

fo sabe] pun gifousy pf oy 2 pope

Rufus; Tpprpmnss PRs PRU BOOP GY] U8 FoR 

UrOUTF pue

pi 200230 PY 95 

113xdR | BPUOYY 

pl SANIT) a

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

00 

TO 

IE 

ORE ER 

1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

Corporations Division Administrator 

CSCLICD- 2700 - DOMESTIC LIMITED LIABILITY 

FILED 

sass moron 

anes COMPANY ANNUAL STATEMENT 

meee 

Doc #: 27635916 

Filed Date: 11/29/2025 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL STATEMENT 

Required by Section 207, Act 23, Public Act of 1993 

Limited Liability Company information 

The present name of the limited liability company is: 

10685 MCCABE ROAD, LLC 

The identification number assigned by the Bureau is: 

803386565 

Filing Year 

2026 

The name of the resident agent at the registered office is: 

RHONDA FACKERT 

Address 

10555 MCCABE ROAD, BRIGHTON, MI 48116 

Mailing Address 

10555 MCCABE ROAD, BRIGHTON, MI 48116 

Attestations 

IX 

1 understand that the information 

| enter into the online system is public information and will appear online and on copy 

requests exactly as 

| enter it into the system. 

IX 

1 have been authorized by the business entity to file this document online. 

IX 

1, HEREBY SWEAR AND/OR AFFIRM, under penalty of law, including criminal prosecution, that the facts contained in this 

document are true. 

| certify that 

| am signing this document as the person(s) whose signature is required, or as an agent 

of the person(s) whose signature is required, who has authorized me to place his/her signature on this document. 

oy — 

Signature 

Self 

Rhonda Fackert 

11/29/2025 

Signer's Capacity 

Sign Here 

Date 

9LZ9-£650D 

uoTSTATA suoTiexodiod uebTUOTW 

Aq PeATS09Y 

S20Z/62/TT

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Filed by Corporations Division Administrator 

Filing Number: 225957330950 

Date: 05/11/2025 

Le. 

Corporationsas 

LARA Online Filing System 

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs 

Form Revision Date 02/2017 

ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION 

For use by DOMESTIC LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 

Pursuant to the provisions of Act 23, Public Acts of 1993, the undersigned executes the following Articles: 

Article I 

| 

The name of the limited liability company is: 

10685 MCCABE ROAD, LLC 

Article IT 

Unless the articles of organization otherwise provide, all limited liability companies formed pursuant to 1993 PA 23 have the purpose of 

engaging in any activity within the purposes for which a limited liability company may be formed under the Limited Liability Company Act of 

Michigan. You may provide a more specific purpose: 

| 

Article III 

The duration of the limited liability company 

if other than perpetual is: 

Article IV 

| 

| The street address of the registered office of the limited liability company and the name of the resident agent at the registered office 

| (P.O. Boxes are not acceptable): 

| 

| 1. 

Agent Name: 

RHONDA FACKERT 

| 

[2. Street Address: 

10555 MCCABE ROAD 

| 

Apt/Suite/Other: 

Hl 

| 

city: 

BRIGHTON 

| 

State: 

MI 

Zip Code: 48116 

| 

i 

| 3. Registered Office Mailing Address: 

| 

P.O. Box or Street 

10555 MCCABE ROAD 

Address: 

Apt/Suite/Other: 

City: 

BRIGHTON 

State: 

MI 

Zip Code: 48116

Signed this 7th Day of May, 2025 by the organizer(s): 

Signature 

Rhonda Fackert 

Organizer 

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

i was selected 

By selecting ACCEPT, 

I hereby acknowledge that this electronic document is being signed in accordance with the Act. 

I further certify 

that to the best of my knowledge the information provided is true, accurate, and in compliance with the Act. 

Decline 

@ Accept

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Filed by Corporations Division Administrator 

Filing Number: 225957330950 

Date: 05/11/2025 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

FILING ENDORSEMENT 

This is to Certify that the 

ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION 

for 

10685 MCCABE ROAD, LLC 

ID Number: 

803386565 

received by electronic transmission on 

May 07, 2025 

, is hereby endorsed. 

Filed on 

May 11, 2025 

, by the Administrator. 

The document is effective on the date filed, unless a subsequent effective date within 90 days after 

received date is stated in the document. 

In testimony whereof, | have hereunto set my 

hand and affixed the Seal of the Department, 

in the City of Lansing, this 11th day 

of May, 2025.

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

= 

2 

TREASURY 

Revenue Administrative Bulletin 1989-48 

Approved: May 31,1989 

SINGLE BUSINESS TAX - ENTITIES UNDER COMMON CONTROL 

(Replaces Single Business Tax Bulletin 1978-1) 

RAB-89-48. This Bulletin is issued to define "entities under common control" for single 

business tax purposes. 

For determining entities under common control under MCL 208.35(2) and MCL 

208.36(4), the Department adopts the U.S. Department of Treasury Regulation 1.414(c) 

relating to two or more trades or businesses qualifying for pension, profit-sharing and 

stock bonus plans. Entities under common control shall include any person as defined in 

MCL 208.6(1) including "an individual, firm, bank, financial institution, limited 

partnership, copartnership, partnership, 

joint venture, association, corporation, receiver, 

estate, trust, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." 

Types of Controlled Groups 

Parent-Subsidiary Group of Entities Under Common Control 

The parent-subsidiary group of entities under common control means one or more 

chains of organizations conducting trades or businesses connected through ownership 

of a controlling interest with a common parent organization and the following 

conditions exist:

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

1. Corporations: 80 percent of total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote, OR, at least 80 

percent of the total value of the shares of all classes of stock of such corporation. 

2. Trusts and estates: ownership of an actuarial interest of at least 80 percent of such trust or estate. [Actuarial 

interest defined: IRC #1.414(c)-2 (b)(2)(ii)] 

3. Partnerships: 80 percent of the profits or capital 

4. Sole proprietorships: ownership of such proprietorship. 

Brother-Sister Group of Entities Under Common Control 

The term "brother-sister group of entities under common control" means two or more 

entities engaged in a business activity, providing the following exists: 

1. The same five or fewer persons who are individuals, estates or trusts own (directly and indirectly) a controlling 

interest in each entity (see page 6 for constructive ownership rules), and 

2. Taking into account the ownership of each such person only to the extent such ownership is identical with respect 

to each such entity, such persons are in effective control of each entity. The five or fewer persons, whose ownership 

is considered for purposes of the controlling interest requirement for each organization, must be the same 

persons whose ownership is considered for purposes of the effective control requirement. 

Effective Control 

Persons are in "effective control" of an organization 

if: 

1. Corporations: Persons own stock greater than 50 percent of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock 

entitled to vote, OR, greater than 50 percent of the total value of shares of all classes of stock of such corporation; 

2. Trusts and estates: Persons own an aggregate actuarial interest of more than 50 percent of such trust or estate; 

3. Partnerships: Persons own an aggregate of more than 50 percent of the profits or capital of such partnership; and 

4. Sole proprietorships: Such person owns such sole proprietorship. 

Combined Group of Entities Under Common Control 

Combined group of entities under common control means any group of three or more 

entities, providing the following conditions exist:

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Example 1: 

Organization(s) Owned 

i 

| 

Owners 

S Corporation 

| 

| 

| 

i 

| 

| 

i 

ABC Partnership 

80% 

I 

ABC Partnership is the common parent of a parent-subsidiary group of businesses under 

| 

common control consisting of the ABC Partnership and S Corporation. 

Example 2: 

| 

Organization(s) Owned 

| 

| 

| 

| 

li 

| 

| 

| 

Owners 

S Corporation 

| 

DEF Partnership 

| 

ABC Partnership 

80% 

bo 

1 

i 

| 

| 

S Corporation 

-- 

| 

80% 

| 

| 

i 

| 

Example 2 facts are the same as example 1 except that S Corporation owns 80 percent of DEF 

Partnership. The ABC Partnership is the common parent of S Corporation, and S Corporation is 

the parent of DEF Partnership. The three entities are part of a group of businesses under 

common control. The result would be the same if the ABC Partnership, rather than S 

Corporation, owned 80 percent of DEF Partnership. 

Example 3: 

Organization(s) Owned 

Owners 

T Corporation 

GHI Partnership 

N Corporation 

L Corporation 

80% 

-- 

80%

i 

Organization(s) Owned 

Owners 

ABC Partnership 

X Corporation 

Y Corporation 

X Corporation 

75% 

25% 

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Y Corporation 

75 

| 

| 

25% 

Interorganization ownership is excluded (that is, treated as not outstanding) for purposes of 

determining whether ABC owns a controlling interest of atleast one of the other organizations. 

ABC is, therefore, treated as the 100 percent stock owner of X and Y Corporations. Therefore, ABC 

is the common parent of a parent-subsidiary group of businesses under common control 

consisting of the ABC Partnership, X Corporation, and Y Corporation 

Example 5: 

Unrelated individuals A, B, C, D and E own various interests in the following businesses: 

Sole proprietorship A, a capital interest in GHI Partnership, and stock of corporations M, 

W, X,Y and Z (one class of stock outstanding) in the following percentages: 

Organization(s) Owned 

Owners 

| 

A 

| 

GHI 

A 

100% 

50% 

B 

-- 

40% 

C 

_— 

_— 

100% 

50% 

10%

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

1.GHI, X and Z 

2.X,Yand Z 

3. WandY 

4. Aand M 

In Group GHI, X and Z, for example, individuals A and B together have effective control of 

each organization, because their combined identical ownership of 

GHI, 

X and Z is 

greater than 50%. (A's identical ownership of GHI, 

X and Z is 40% because A owns at least 

a 40% interest in each organization. B's identical ownership of GHI, X and Z is 30%.) 

Individuals A and B (persons whose ownership is considered for purposes of the 

effective control requirement) together own a controlling interest in each organization, 

because they own at least 80% of the capital interest of partnership GHI and at least 80% 

of corporations X and Z. 

Y is not a member of GHI, X and Z because neither the effective control requirement nor 

the 80% controlling interest requirement are met. The effective control requirement is 

not met, because A's and B's combined identical ownership in GHI, X,Y and Z does not 

exceed 50% (20% for A and 30% for B). The controlling interest test is not met, because A 

and B together only own 70% of the Y. 

A and M are not members of this group, because 

B owns no interest in either organization and A's ownership of GHI, X and Z, considered 

alone, is less than 80%. 

Example 6: 

Organization(s) Owned 

Shareholders 

Corporation U 

Corporation V 

A 

12% 

12% 

B 

2% 

2%

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

le 

LC 

12% 

12% 

H 

12% 

12% 

Any group of five of the shareholders will own more than 50% of the stock in each corporation, in 

| 

identical holdings. However, U and V are not members of a brother-sister group of business 

under common control because at least 80% of the stock of each corporation is not owned by 

the same five or fewer persons. 

i 

Exclusion of Certain Interests or Stock in Determining Control 

The terms "interest" and "stock" do not include an interest that is treated as not 

outstanding. (See following discussion). Also, the term "stock" does not include treasury 

stock or nonvoting stock that is limited and preferred as to dividends. 

If a parent organization has effective control of another subsidiary organization, then the 

"interest" owned by the principal owners of the parent organization and subsidiary 

organization shall be treated as not outstanding.. A principal owner is a person (or entity) 

who has an "interest" in both the parent organization and the subsidiary organization. 

(See the following examples and refer to IRS Reg. 1.414(c)-3 for details.) 

Example 1: 

Organization(s) Owned 

Owners 

| 

DEF Partnership 

ABC Partnership 

70% 

Individual A 

4% 

| 

Individual D 

"26%

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Organization(s) Owned 

| 

Owners 

| 

X Corporation 

Y Corporation 

| 

ABC Partnership 

| 

70% 

| 

-- 

Individual A 

| 

4% 

| 

15% 

Individual D 

| 

26% 

| 

- 

DEF Partnership 

-- 

75% 

| 

Same facts as Example 1 and assume further that A owns 15% and DEF owns 75% of S 

Corporation. ABC satisfies the 50% effective control requirement with respect to S Corporation 

since ABC Partnership is considered as owning 52.5% (70% x 75%) of S Corporation. Since Ais a 

partner of the ABC Partnership, the S stock owned by A is treated as not outstanding for 

purposes of determining whether S is 

a member of a parent-subsidiary group. Thus, DEF 

Partnership is considered to own 88.2% of S Corporation (DEF's 75% ownership of S Corporation 

divided by total outstanding S Corporation ownership of 85%). ABC Partnership, DEF Partnership, 

and S Corporation are members of a parent-subsidiary group. 

Rules for Determining Control 

The Department will follow the IRS rules on exclusion of certain interest or stock in 

determining control. (See IRS Regulation 1.414.(c)-3.) 

Constructive Ownership 

The Department will follow the IRS Rules for determining constructive ownership. This 

means ownership attributed from partnerships, estates, trusts, corporations, spouse, and 

relatives will be used in determining entities under common control. (See IRS 

Regulation 1.414(c)-4.)

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

THE GENERAL PROPERTY TAX ACT (EXCERPT) 

Act 206 of 1893 

211.27a Property tax assessment; determining taxable value; adjustment; exception; 

"transfer of ownership" defined; qualified agricultural property; notice of transfer of 

property; notification of recorded transaction; definitions. 

Sec. 27a. 

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, property shall be assessed at 50% of its 

true cash value under section 3 of article IX of the state constitution of 1963. 

(2) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3), for taxes levied in 1995 and for each 

year after 1995, the taxable value of each parcel of property is the lesser of the following: 

(a) The property's taxable value in the immediately preceding year minus any losses, 

multiplied by the lesser of 1.05 or the inflation rate, plus all additions. For taxes levied in 

1995, the property's taxable value in the immediately preceding year is the property's state 

equalized valuation in 1994. 

(b) The property's current state equalized valuation. 

(3) Upon a transfer of ownership of property after 1994, the property's taxable value for the 

calendar year following the year of the transfer is the property's state equalized valuation for 

the calendar year following the transfer. 

(4) If the taxable value of property is adjusted under subsection (3), a subsequent increase in 

the property's taxable value is subject to the limitation set forth in subsection (2) until a 

subsequent transfer of ownership occurs. If the taxable value of property is adjusted under 

subsection (3) and the assessor determines that there had not been a transfer of ownership, the 

taxable value of the property shall be adjusted at the July or December board of review. 

Notwithstanding the limitation provided in section 53b(1) on the number of years for which a 

correction may be made, the July or December board of review may adjust the taxable value 

of property under this subsection for the current year and for the 3 immediately preceding 

calendar years. A corrected tax bill shall be issued for each tax year for which the taxable 

value is adjusted by the local tax collecting unit if the local tax collecting unit has possession 

of the tax roll or by the county treasurer if the county has possession of the tax roll. For 

purposes of section 53b, an adjustment under this subsection shall be considered the correction 

of a clerical error. 

(5) Assessment of property, as required in this section and section 27, is inapplicable to the 

assessment of property subject to the levy of ad valorem taxes within voted tax limitation 

increases to pay principal and interest on limited tax bonds issued by any governmental unit, 

including a county, township, community college district, or school district, before January 1, 

1964, if the assessment required to be made under this act would be less than the assessment 

as state equalized prevailing on the property at the time of the issuance of the bonds. This

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

(b) A conveyance by land contract. The taxable value of property conveyed by a land 

contract executed after December 31, 1994 shall be adjusted under subsection (3) for the 

calendar year following the year in which the contract is entered into and shall not be 

subsequently adjusted under subsection (3) when the deed conveying title to the property is 

recorded in the office of the register of deeds in the county in which the property is located. 

(c) 

A conveyance to a trust after December 31, 1994, except under any of the following 

conditions: 

(1) If the settlor or the settlor's spouse, or both, conveys the property to the trust and the sole 

present beneficiary or beneficiaries are the settlor or the settlor's spouse, or both. 

(if) Beginning December 31, 2014, for residential real property, if the settlor or the settlor's 

spouse, or both, conveys the residential real property to the trust and the sole present 

beneficiary or beneficiaries are the settlor's or the settlor's spouse's mother, father, brother, 

sister, son, daughter, adopted son, adopted daughter, grandson, or granddaughter and the 

residential real property is not used for any commercial purpose following the conveyance. 

Upon request by the department of treasury or the assessor, the sole present beneficiary or 

beneficiaries shall furnish proof within 30 days that the sole present beneficiary or 

beneficiaries meet the requirements of this subparagraph. If a present beneficiary fails to 

comply with a request by the department of treasury or assessor under this subparagraph, that 

present beneficiary is subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(d) A conveyance by distribution from a trust, except under any of the following conditions: 

(1) If the distributee is the sole present beneficiary or the spouse of the sole present 

beneficiary, or both. 

(ii) Beginning December 31, 2014, a distribution of residential real property if the 

distributee is the settlor's or the settlor's spouse's mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, 

adopted son, adopted daughter, grandson, or granddaughter and the residential real property is 

not used for any commercial purpose following the conveyance. Upon request by the 

department of treasury or the assessor, the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries shall 

furnish proof within 30 days that the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries meet the 

requirements of this subparagraph. If a present beneficiary fails to comply with a request by 

the department of treasury or assessor under this subparagraph, that present beneficiary is 

subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(e) A change in the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries of a trust, except under any of 

the following conditions: 

(1) A change that adds or substitutes the spouse of the sole present beneficiary. 

(ii) Beginning December 31, 2014, for residential real property, a change that adds or 

substitutes the settlor's or the settlor's spouse's mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, 

adopted son, adopted daughter, grandson, or granddaughter and the residential real property is 

not used for any commercial purpose following the conveyance. Upon request by the 

department of treasury or the assessor, the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries shall 

furnish proof within 30 days that the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries meet the 

requirements of this subparagraph. If a present beneficiary fails to comply with a request by

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

adopted daughter, grandson, or granddaughter and the residential real property is not used for 

any commercial purpose following the conveyance. Upon request by the department of 

treasury or the assessor, the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries shall furnish proof within 

30 days that the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries meet the requirements of this 

subparagraph. If a present beneficiary fails to comply with a request by the department of 

treasury or assessor under this subparagraph, that present beneficiary is subject to a fine of 

$200.00. 

(g) A conveyance by lease if the total duration of the lease, including the initial term and all 

options for renewal, is more than 35 years or the lease grants the lessee a bargain purchase 

option. As used in this subdivision, "bargain purchase option" means the right to purchase the 

property at the termination of the lease for not more than 80% of the property's projected true 

cash value at the termination of the lease. After December 31, 1994, the taxable value of 

property conveyed by a lease with a total duration of more than 35 years or with a bargain 

purchase option shall be adjusted under subsection (3) for the calendar year following the year 

in which the lease is entered into. This subdivision does not apply to personal property except 

buildings described in section 14(6) and personal property described in section 8(h), (i), and 

(§)- This subdivision does not apply to that portion of the property not subject to the leasehold 

interest conveyed. 

(h) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, a conveyance of an ownership interest 

in a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, limited liability company, limited liability 

partnership, or other legal entity if the ownership interest conveyed is more than 50% of the 

corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, limited liability company, limited liability 

partnership, or other legal entity. Unless notification is provided under subsection (10), the 

corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, limited liability company, limited liability 

partnership, or other legal entity shall notify the assessing officer on a form provided by the 

state tax commission not more than 45 days after a conveyance of an ownership interest that 

constitutes a transfer of ownership under this subdivision. Both of the following apply to a 

corporation subject to 1897 PA 230, MCL 455.1 to 455.24: 

(1) A transfer of stock of the corporation is a transfer of ownership only with respect to the 

real property that is assessed to the transferor lessee stockholder. 

(ii) A cumulative conveyance of more than 50% of the corporation's stock does not 

constitute a transfer of ownership of the corporation's real property. 

(i) A transfer of property held as a tenancy in common, except that portion of the property 

not subject to the ownership interest conveyed. 

(j) A conveyance of an ownership interest in a cooperative housing corporation, except that 

portion of the property not subject to the ownership interest conveyed. 

(k) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 7ee(5), at the request of a property owner, an 

assessor's establishment of a separate tax parcel for a portion of a parcel that ceases to be 

qualified agricultural property but is not subject to a land division under the land division act, 

1967 PA 288, MCL 560.101 to 560.293, or any local ordinance. For purposes of this 

subdivision, a transfer of ownership occurs only as to that portion of the parcel established as a

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

(7) Transfer of ownership does not include the following: 

(a) The transfer of property from 1 spouse to the other spouse or from a decedent to a 

surviving spouse. 

(b) A transfer from a husband, a wife, or a married couple creating or disjoining a tenancy 

by the entireties in the grantors or the grantor and his or her spouse. 

(c) Subject to subdivision (d), a transfer of that portion of property subject to a life estate or 

life lease retained by the transferor, until expiration or termination of the life estate or life 

lease. That portion of property transferred that is not subject to a life lease shall be adjusted 

under subsection (3). 

(d) Beginning December 31, 2014, a transfer of that portion of residential real property that 

had been subject to a life estate or life lease retained by the transferor resulting from expiration 

or termination of that life estate or life lease, if the transferee is the transferor's or transferor's 

spouse's mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, adopted son, adopted daughter, grandson, 

or granddaughter and the residential real property is not used for any commercial purpose 

following the transfer. Upon request by the department of treasury or the assessor, the 

transferee shall furnish proof within 30 days that the transferee meets the requirements of this 

subdivision. If a transferee fails to comply with a request by the department of treasury or 

assessor under this subdivision, that transferee is subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(e) A transfer through foreclosure or forfeiture of a recorded instrument under chapter 31, 

32, or 57 of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.3101 to 600.3285 and 

MCL 600.5701 to 600.5759, or through deed or conveyance in lieu of a foreclosure or 

forfeiture, until the mortgagee or land contract vendor subsequently transfers the property. If a 

mortgagee does not transfer the property within 

1 year of the expiration of any applicable 

redemption period, the property shall be adjusted under subsection (3). 

(f) A transfer by redemption by the person to whom taxes are assessed of property 

previously sold for delinquent taxes. 

(g) A conveyance to a trust if the settlor or the settlot's spouse, or both, conveys the property 

to the trust and any of the following conditions are satisfied: 

(i) If the sole present beneficiary of the trust is the settlor or the settlor's spouse, or both. 

(ii) Beginning December 31, 2014, for residential real property, if the sole present 

beneficiary of the trust is the settlor's or the settlor's spouse's mother, father, brother, sister, 

son, daughter, adopted son, adopted daughter, grandson, or granddaughter and the residential 

real property is not used for any commercial purpose following the conveyance. Upon request 

by the department of treasury or the assessor, the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries shall 

furnish proof within 30 days that the sole present beneficiary or beneficiaries meet the 

requirements of this subparagraph. If a present beneficiary fails to comply with a request by 

the department of treasury or assessor under this subparagraph, that present beneficiary is 

subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(h) A transfer pursuant to a judgment or order of a court of record making or ordering a 

transfer, unless a specific monetary consideration is specified or ordered by the court for the 

transfer.

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

purposes of this subdivision, a person is an original owner of property owned by that person's 

spouse. 

(j) A transfer for security or an assignment or discharge of a security interest. 

(k) A transfer of real property or other ownership interests among members of an affiliated 

group. As used in this subsection, "affiliated group" means 

1 or more corporations connected 

by stock ownership to a common parent corporation. Upon request by the state tax 

commission, a corporation shall furnish proof within 45 days that a transfer meets the 

requirements of this subdivision. 

A corporation that fails to comply with a request by the state 

tax commission under this subdivision is subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(1) Normal public trading of shares of stock or other ownership interests that, over any 

period of time, cumulatively represent more than 50% of the total ownership interest in a 

corporation or other legal entity and are traded in multiple transactions involving unrelated 

individuals, institutions, or other legal entities. 

(m) A transfer of real property or other ownership interests among corporations, 

partnerships, limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships, or other legal entities if 

the entities involved are commonly controlled. Upon request by the state tax commission, a 

corporation, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, or other legal 

entity shall furnish proof within 45 days that a transfer meets the requirements of this 

subdivision. 

A corporation, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, 

or other legal entity that fails to comply with a request by the state tax commission under this 

subdivision is subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(n) A direct or indirect transfer of real property or other ownership interests resulting from a 

transaction that qualifies as a tax-free reorganization under section 368 of the internal revenue 

code, 26 USC 368. Upon request by the state tax commission, a property owner shall furnish 

proof within 45 days that a transfer meets the requirements of this subdivision. A property 

owner who fails to comply with a request by the state tax commission under this subdivision is 

subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(0) Except as provided in subsection (6)(k), a transfer of qualified agricultural property, if 

the person to whom the qualified agricultural property is transferred files an affidavit with the 

assessor of the local tax collecting unit in which the qualified agricultural property is located 

and with the register of deeds for the county in which the qualified agricultural property is 

located attesting that the qualified agricultural property will remain qualified agricultural 

property. The affidavit under this subdivision shall be in a form prescribed by the department 

of treasury. An owner of qualified agricultural property shall inform a prospective buyer of 

that qualified agricultural property that the qualified agricultural property is subject to the 

recapture tax provided in the agricultural property recapture act, 2000 PA 261, MCL 211.1001 

to 211.1007, if the qualified agricultural property is converted by a change in use, as that term 

is defined in section 2 of the agricultural property recapture act, 2000 PA 261, MCL 211.1002. 

If property ceases to be qualified agricultural property at any time after a transfer subject to 

this subdivision, all of the following shall occur: 

(i) The taxable value of that property, or, if subsection (6)(k) applies, a portion of it

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

(p) A transfer of qualified forest property, if the person to whom the qualified forest 

property is transferred files a qualified forest taxable value affidavit with the assessor of the 

local tax collecting unit in which the qualified forest property is located and with the register 

of deeds for the county in which the qualified forest property is located attesting that the 

qualified forest property will remain qualified forest property. The qualified forest taxable 

value affidavit under this subdivision shall be in a form prescribed by the department of 

agriculture and rural development. The qualified forest taxable value affidavit shall include a 

legal description of the qualified forest property, the name of the new property owner, the year 

the transfer of the property occurred, a statement indicating that the property owner is attesting 

that the property for which the exemption is claimed is qualified forest property and will be 

managed according to the approved forest management plan, and any other information 

pertinent to the parcel and the property owner. The property owner shall provide a copy of the 

qualified forest taxable value affidavit to the department. The department shall provide 

1 copy 

of the qualified forest taxable value affidavit to the local tax collecting unit, 

1 copy to the 

conservation district, and 

1 copy to the department of treasury. These copies may be sent 

electronically. The exception to the recognition of a transfer of ownership, as herein stated, 

extends to the land only of the qualified forest property. If qualified forest property is 

improved by buildings, structures, or land improvements, then those improvements shall be 

recognized as a transfer of ownership, in accordance with the provisions of section 7jj[1]. An 

owner of qualified forest property shall inform a prospective buyer of that qualified forest 

property that the qualified forest property is subject to the recapture tax provided in the 

qualified forest property recapture tax act, 2006 PA 379, MCL 211.1031 to 211.1036, if the 

qualified forest property is converted by a change in use, as that term is defined in section 2 of 

the qualified forest property recapture tax act, 2006 PA 379, MCL 211.1032. If property ceases 

to be qualified forest property at any time after being transferred, all of the following shall 

occur: 

(i) The taxable value of that property shall be adjusted under subsection (3) as of the 

December 31 in the year that the property ceases to be qualified forest property, except to the 

extent that the transfer of the qualified forest property would not have been considered a 

transfer of ownership under this subsection. 

(ii) Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (iii), the property is subject to the 

recapture tax provided for under the qualified forest property recapture tax act, 2006 PA 379, 

MCL 211.1031 to 211.1036. 

(iii) Beginning June 1, 2013 and ending November 30, 2013, owners of property enrolled as 

qualified forest property before January 1, 2013 may execute a new qualified forest taxable 

value affidavit with the department of agriculture and rural development. If a landowner elects 

to execute a qualified forest taxable value affidavit, that owner is not required to pay the 

$50.00 fee required under section 7jj[1](2). If a landowner elects not to execute a qualified 

forest taxable value affidavit, the existing affidavit shall be rescinded, without subjecting the 

property to the recapture tax provided for under the qualified forest property recapture tax act, 

2006 PA 379, MCL 211.1031 to 211.1036, and the taxable value of that property shall be

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

(ii) A transfer of ownership of the land or a transfer of an interest in the land is eligible for a 

deduction as a qualified conservation contribution under section 170(h) of the internal revenue 

code, 26 USC 170. 

(r) A transfer of real property or other ownership interests resulting from a consolidation or 

merger of a domestic nonprofit corporation that is a boy or girl scout or camp fire girls 

organization, a 4-H club or foundation, a young men's Christian association, or a young 

women's Christian association and at least 50% of the members of that organization or 

association are residents of this state. 

(s) A change to the assessment roll or tax roll resulting from the application of section 16a 

of 1897 PA 230, MCL 455.16a. 

(t) Beginning December 31, 2013 through December 30, 2014, a transfer of residential real 

property if the transferee is related to the transferor by blood or affinity to the first degree and 

the use of the residential real property does not change following the transfer. 

(u) Beginning December 31, 2014, a transfer of residential real property if the transferee is 

the transferor's or the transferor's spouse's mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, adopted 

son, adopted daughter, grandson, or granddaughter and the residential real property is not used 

for any commercial purpose following the conveyance. Upon request by the department of 

treasury or the assessor, the transferee shall furnish proof within 30 days that the transferee 

meets the requirements of this subdivision. If a transferee fails to comply with a request by the 

department of treasury or assessor under this subdivision, that transferee is subject to a fine of 

$200.00. 

(v) Beginning December 31, 2014, for residential real property, a conveyance from a trust if 

the person to whom the residential real property is conveyed is the settlor's or the settlor's 

spouse's mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, adopted son, adopted daughter, grandson, 

or granddaughter and the residential real property is not used for any commercial purpose 

following the conveyance. Upon request by the department of treasury or the assessor, the sole 

present beneficiary or beneficiaries shall furnish proof within 30 days that the sole present 

beneficiary or beneficiaries meet the requirements of this subdivision. If a present beneficiary 

fails to comply with a request by the department of treasury or assessor under this subdivision, 

that present beneficiary is subject to a fine of $200.00. 

(w) Beginning on March 31, 2015, a conveyance of land by distribution under a will or trust 

or by intestate succession, but not buildings or structures located on the land, which meets 

1 or 

more of the following requirements: 

(i) The land is made subject to a conservation easement under subpart 11 of part 21 of the 

natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.2140 to 324.2144, 

prior to the conveyance by distribution under a will or trust or by intestate succession. As used 

in this subparagraph, "conservation easement" means that term as defined in section 2140 of 

the natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.2140. 

(ii) The land or an interest in the land is made eligible for a deduction as a qualified 

conservation contribution under section 170(h) of the internal revenue code, 26 USC 170, 

prior to the conveyance by distribution under a will or trust or by intestate succession.

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

since December 31, 1999 and there had been no adjustment of that qualified agricultural 

property's taxable value under subsection (3) since December 31, 1999: 

(2) The qualified agricultural property was qualified agricultural property for taxes levied in 

1999 and each year after 1999. 

(b) The owner of the qualified agricultural property files an affidavit with the assessor of the 

local tax collecting unit under subsection (7)(o). 

(9) If the taxable value of qualified agricultural property is adjusted under subsection (8), 

the owner of that qualified agricultural property is not entitled to a refund for any property 

taxes collected under this act on that qualified agricultural property before the adjustment 

under subsection (8). 

(10) The register of deeds of the county where deeds or other title documents are recorded 

shall notify the assessing officer of the appropriate local taxing unit not less than once each 

month of any recorded transaction involving the ownership of property and shall make any 

recorded deeds or other title documents available to that county's tax or equalization 

department. Unless notification is provided under subsection (6), the buyer, grantee, or other 

transferee of the property shall notify the appropriate assessing office in the local unit of 

government in which the property is located of the transfer of ownership of the property 

within 45 days of the transfer of ownership, on a form prescribed by the state tax commission 

that states the parties to the transfer, the date of the transfer, the actual consideration for the 

transfer, and the property's parcel identification number or legal description. Forms filed in the 

assessing office of a local unit of government under this subsection shall be made available to 

the county tax or equalization department for the county in which that local unit of 

government is located. This subsection does not apply to personal property except buildings 

described in section 14(6) and personal property described in section 8(h), (i), and (j). 

(11) As used in this section: 

(a) "Additions" means that term as defined in section 34d. 

(b) "Beneficial use" means the right to possession, use, and enjoyment of property, limited 

only by encumbrances, easements, and restrictions of record. 

(c) "Commercial purpose" means used in connection with any business or other undertaking 

intended for profit, but does not include the rental of residential real property for a period of 

less than 15 days in a calendar year. 

(d) "Inflation rate" means that term as defined in section 34d. 

(e) "Losses" means that term as defined in section 34d. 

(f) "Qualified agricultural property" means that term as defined in section 7dd. 

(g) "Qualified forest property" means that term as defined in section 7jj[ 1]. 

(h) "Residential real property" means real property classified as residential real property 

under section 34c. 

History: Add. 1982, Act 539, Eff. Mar. 30, 1983 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 145, Imd. Eff. Aug. 19, 1993 ;-- 

Am. 

1993, Act 313, Eff. Mar. 15, 1994 ;-- Am. 1994, Act 415, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 1994 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 476, 

Imd. Eff. Dec. 26, 1996 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 260, Eff. Mar. 28, 2001 ;-- Am. 2005, Act 23, Imd. Eff. May 23, 

2005 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 378, Imd. Eff. Sept. 27, 2006 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 446, Imd. Eff. Dec. 8, 2006 ;--

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

STATE 

OF MICHIGAN 

COURT 

OF APPEALS 

TRJ & E PROPERTIES, LLC, 

FOR PUBLICATION 

April 17, 2018 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

9:20 a.m. 

v 

No. 

338992 

Tax Tribunal 

CITY OF LANSING, 

LC No. 

16-000408-TT 

Respondent-Appellant. 

Before: O’BRIEN, P.J., and CAVANAGH and STEPHENS, JJ. 

PER CURIAM. 

Respondent, City of Lansing, appeals by right an order of the Michigan Tax Tribunal 

granting summary disposition in favor of petitioner, TRJ & E Properties, LLC, and concluding 

that respondent had erroneously uncapped the taxable value of property that had been transferred 

to petitioner by a commonly controlled entity, TRJ Properties, Inc. (TRJ Properties). We affirm. 

In 2015, TRJ Properties owned an apartment building and transferred its interest mn that 

property to petitioner. The ownership interests in petitioner are as follows: 25% by Tony Farida, 

25% by Ricky Farida, 25% by Jeffrey Farida, and 25% by Eric Farida. 

TRJ Properties was 

owned as follows: 40% by Hamid Farida, 20% by Tony Farida, 20% by Ricky Farida, and 20% 

by Jeffrey Farida. Hamid is the father of Tony, Ricky, Jeffrey, and Eric. Petitioner’s operating 

agreement provides that, subject to specific exceptions, “the affirmative vote of a majority of the 

Shares of all Members entitled to vote on such a matter is required.” 

Respondent determined that the property transfer was an uncapping event under MCL 

211.27a(3), and increased the property’s taxable value from $468,746 to $535,200. 

Petitioner 

petitioned the Tax Tribunal to reverse respondent’s decision uncapping the property’s taxable 

value, asserting that the transfer was between commonly controlled entities and thus exempt 

from uncapping under MCL 211.27a(7)(in).

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

Petitioner also moved for summary disposition. 

Petitioner argued that TRJ Properties 

and petitioner were commonly controlled because the same siblings owned a controlling interest 

in each entity, where a controlling interest was 50% or more of the combined voting power in 

each entity. 

Petitioner alternatively argued that common control existed under RAB 2010-1 

because a parent indirectly controlled, through his or her children, both entities. Because Hamid 

was the father 

of all the siblings who had 

an ownership 

interest 

in each entity, Hamid 

constructively controlled 100% of both entities. Accordingly, no uncapping event occurred. 

The Tax Tribunal determined that the parties had effectively moved for summary 

disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10). 

The Tax Tribunal noted that respondent was arguing that 

the common control rules of RAB 1989-48 applied, but not the constructive ownership rules in 

RAB 2010-1. 

It rejected respondent’s argument that RAB 1989-48 applied and declined to adopt 

RAB 1989-48’s requirements because “[t]Jo apply such a rule would be to add requirements not 

present in the statute, and thus exercising legislative power without authority, by creating or 

changing the laws enacted by the Legislature.” 

Instead, the Tax Tribunal applied the plain 

language of MCL 211.27a which provides that 

a transfer of ownership uncaps 

a property’s 

taxable value for the following tax year, but a transfer of ownership does not include “[a] transfer 

of real property... among... 

other legal entities 

if the entities involved are commonly 

controlled.” MCL 211.27a(3), 211.27a(7)(m). 

In this case, the Tax Tribunal noted, Tony, Ricky, and Jeffrey's 60% interest in TRJ 

Properties controlled that entity, and Tony, Ricky, and Jeffrey's 75% interest in petitioner also 

controlled that entity. 

Petitioner’s Articles of Organization showed that “a mere majority of 

shares of all members is required to act.” Accordingly, both entities were controlled by three of 

the four Farida brothers, and thus the entities were commonly controlled. 

Therefore, MCL 

211.27a(7)(m) applied and “the property’s taxable value remains capped.” This appeal followed. 

Respondent argues that the Tax Tribunal erred when it determined that these two entities 

were commonly controlled for the purposes of MCL 211.27a(7)(m) because RAB 1989-48 

provides that common control requires 80% of the combined voting power be shared between 

two entities and, in this case, the combined voting power of the people who controlled the two 

entities was 60% and 75%, respectively. We disagree. 

This Court reviews 

de novo 

a lower tribunal's decision on 

a motion for summary 

disposition. Maiden v Rozwood, 461 Mich 109, 118; 597 NW2d 817 (1999). A party is entitled 

to summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10)" if there is no genuine issue as to any material 

fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id. at 120. 

This Court’s review of a decision by the Tax Tribunal is limited. 

Mich Props, LLC v 

Meridian Twp, 491 Mich 518, 527; 817 NW2d 548 (2012). When a party does not dispute the

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

wrong principle.” Id. at 527-528. This Court reviews de novo the interpretation and application 

of tax statutes. 

Id. at 528. 

If the plain and ordinary meaning of a statute’s language is clear, this 

Court will not engage in judicial construction. 

Paris Meadows, LLC v City of Kentwood, 287 

Mich App 136, 141; 783 NW2d 133 (2010). When interpreting a statute, this Court’s goal is to 

give effect to the intent of the Legislature. 

Sun Valley Foods Co v Ward, 460 Mich 230, 236; 

596 NW2d 119 (1999). 

The language of the statute itself is the primary indicator of the 

Legislature’s intent. Id. 

The General Property Tax Act (GPTA) provides for the taxation of real and personal 

property. MCL 211.1 ef seq. Generally, a property’s taxable value is determined by the lesser of 

(1) the property’s current state equalized value, or (2) the property’s taxable value in the previous 

year, minus losses, multiplied by 1.05 or the inflation rate, plus all additions. MCL 211.27a(2). 

This limitation, which 

is based on Const 1963, 

art 9, 

§ 

3, effectively caps increases on 

a 

property's taxable value so that “any yearly increase in taxable value is limited to either the rate 

of inflation or 

5 percent, whichever 

is less.” 

Mich Props, 491 Mich 

at 528-529. 

[T]he 

property’s taxable value is uncapped when the property is transferred.” Id. at 529; see also MCL 

211.27a(3). 

However, there are several exceptions under which a transfer of ownership will not uncap 

the property’s taxable value. Detroit Lions, Inc v Citv of Dearborn, 302 Mich App 676, 694; 840 

NW2d 

168 (2013). 

One of these exceptions 

is 

“[a] transfer of real property... among 

corporations 

. 

. 

. or other legal entities if the entities involved are commonly controlled.” MCL 

211.27a(7)(m). 

This 

is the exception that the parties dispute 

in this case—specifically, the 

meaning of the phrase “conunonly controlled,” and what percentage of common ownership 

renders two entities commonly controlled. 

This Court has only addressed common control in two published decisions, and neither 

decision determined that a specific percentage of ownership constitutes common control. 

In 

Sebastian J Mancuso Family Trust v City of Charlevoix, 300 Mich App 1, 7-8; 831 NW2d 907 

(2013), this Court held that two trusts were not commonly controlled when they had the same 

trustees. 

This Court reasoned that the common control exception® did not apply because trustees 

only manage the property, but the statute applies when there is a change in the ownership of the 

property. 

Id. at 7. 

Accordingly, the common control exception does not apply to a transfer of 

property from one owner to a new owner even if the trustees of both owners are the same. 

Id. at 

8. 

And in Detroit Lions, 302 Mich App at 694, this Court concluded that two entities—Ford 

Land and WCF Land—were not commonly controlled because, while William Clay Ford, Sr., 

owned WCF Land, “it is undisputed that Ford Land 

. 

. 

. is not under the control of Mr. Ford.” 

Neither case addressed what amount of control constitutes common control. 

We turn to principles of statutory interpretation to determine the meaning of “commonly

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

import of the terms employed, in view of the subject matter of the law[.]” Hughes v Region VII 

Area Agency on Aging, 277 Mich App 268, 274; 744 NW2d 10 (2007) (quotation marks and 

citation omitted). 

This Court should read phrases “in the context of the entire legislative 

scheme.” Madugula v Taub, 496 Mich 685, 696; 853 NW2d 75 (2014). While the GPTA does 

not define “commonly controlled” in MCL 211.27a or elsewhere, it does define “under common 

control with” as it relates to personal property taxation exemptions. MCL 211.90(7) provides, in 

pertinent part: 

As used in this section: 

(b) “Control”, “controlled by”, and “under common control with” mean 

the possession of the power to direct or cause the direction of the management 

and policies of a related entity, directly or indirectly, whether derived from a 

management position, official office, or corporate office held by an individual; by 

an ownership interest, beneficial interest, or equitable interest; or by contractual 

agreement or other similar arrangement. 

. 

. 

While we recognize that this definition does not expressly or directly apply to MCL 

211.27a(7)(m), 

it is 

a reliable and persuasive indication of the Legislature’s intent and allows 

consistency throughout the GPTA’s legislative scheme. 

See Madugula, 496 Mich at 696; Sun 

Valley Foods Co, 460 Mich at 236. 

And this definition is particularly appropriate because it 

recognizes that different percentages of control may be necessary to direct the management of 

different corporate entities. 

For instance, if an entity requires a supermajority to undertake any 

action, a mere majority of common shareholders would not be sufficient to constitute common 

control of the entities under this definition. 

Further, this definition focuses on the actual control of the business on the basis of its 

corporate structure. 

Numerous federal decisions tie the meaning of “common control” to the 

actual control of the business. 

See, e.g., Chao v A-One Med Servs, Inc, 346 F3d 908, 915 (CA 9, 

2003); Vittoria North America, LLC v Euro-Asia Imports Inc, 278 F3d 1076, 1084 (CA 10, 

2001). 

This Court may consider foreign authority as persuasive authority when deciding issues 

of state law. Mettler Walloon, LLC v Melrose Twp, 281 Mich App 184, 221 n 6; 761 NW2d 293 

* The remainder of MCL 211.90(7)(b) contains additional language: 

There 

is 

a rebuttable presumption that control exists if any person, directly or 

indirectly, owns, controls, or holds the power to vote, directly or by proxy, 10% 

or more of the ownership interest of any other person or has contributed more

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

(2008). 

As a practical matter, no single percentage—whether the 80% that respondent suggests, 

or the more than 50% that petitioner suggests—will apply universally to diverse corporate 

structures. 

For this reason, we decline to adopt any specific percentage as the definition of 

common control. 

Moreover, if the Legislature had intended such a particular requirement, 

it 

could have specifically defined the phrase “commonly controlled” accordingly. 

In this case, the Tax Tribunal did not err when it determined that TJR Properties and 

petitioner were commonly 

controlled. 

Tony, 

Ricky, 

and Jeffrey controlled 60% 

of TRJ 

Properties, and 75% of petitioner. 

According to petitioner's operating agreement, 

a mere 

majority is required for 

it to act. 

While petitioner did not provide an operating agreement for 

TRJ Properties, petitioner repeatedly asserted that only 50% of the combined voting power of 

TRI Properties was required for it to act and respondent never disputed this fact. Therefore, both 

entities were actually controlled by Tony, Ricky, and Jeffrey. Accordingly, the Tax Tribunal did 

not commit an error of law or adopt a wrong principle when it determined that TRJ Properties 

and petitioner were commonly controlled under MCL 211.27a(7)(m). 

In reaching our conclusion, we also reject respondent’s argument that the Tax Tribunal 

was required 

to follow 

the STC’s transfer 

of ownership guidelines and related revenue 

administrative 

bulletins, 

including RAB 

1989-48, 

to 

determine whether 

the 

transfer was 

excluded from uncapping under MCL 211.27a. 

As the Tax Tribunal held, 

it 

is not bound to 

follow STC guidelines that impose requirements not present within the statute’s plain language. 

Further, the STC guidelines did not provide any interpretation of MCL 211.27a(7)(m), and thus 

the Tax Tribunal properly applied the general rules of statutory construction to the statute. 

It is well established that “agency interpretations are entitled to respectful consideration, 

but they are not binding on courts and cannot conflict with the plain meaning of the statute.” In 

re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Mich, 482 Mich 90, 117-118; 754 NW2d 259 (2008). 

“[A]gencies cannot exercise legislative power by creating law or changing the laws enacted by 

the Legislature.” 

Id. 

at 98. 

An agency's interpretation may be helpful “when the law 

is 

‘doubtful or obscure.’ 

” 

Id. 

at 103 (citation omitted). 

However, agency interpretations of 

statutes are not entitled to deference when they conflict with the language of a statute. Id. at 108. 

In Rovas, the Michigan Supreme Court was considering the meaning of the word “false” 

in MCL 484.2502(1)(A). Id. at 111-112. The Public Service Commission (PSC) had determined 

that the statute penalized factually inaccurate statements. 

Id. at 112. However, the PSC did not 

analyze the statutory language or provide a rationale for its conclusion that the word “false” 

meant untrue or incorrect. 

Id. at 113. Accordingly, the PSC had not provided any construction 

of the statute, and there was no construction for a reviewing court to respectfully consider. 

7d. 

Because the PSC had failed to offer any construction, the Supreme Court had to provide “an 

interpretation of the plain language of the statute.” Id.

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

controlling interest in each of the organizations 

. 

. 

. is owned (directly and indirectly) by one or 

more of the other organizations,” with “controlling interest” defined as follows: 

A controlling interest means: 

1. Corporations: 80 percent of total combined voting power of all classes 

of stock entitled to vote, OR, at least 80 percent of the total value of the shares of 

all classes of stock of such corporation. 

2. Trusts and estates: ownership of an actuarial interest of at least 80 

percent of such trust or estate. 

[Actuarial interest defined: IRC #1.414(c)-2 

®@))] 

3. Partnerships: 80 percent of the profits or capital. 

4. Sole proprietorships: ownership of such proprietorship. [RAB 1989-48, 

pp 1-2] 

For the purposes of brother-sister groups, RAB 1989-48 provides: 

The term “brother-sister group of entities under common control” means 

two or more entities engaged in 

a business activity, providing the following 

exists: 

1. The same five or fewer persons who are individuals, estates or trusts 

own (directly and indirectly) a controlling interest in each entity (see page 6 for 

constructive ownership rules), and 

2. Taking into account the ownership of each such person only to the 

extent such ownership is identical with respect to each such entity, such persons 

are 

in effective 

control of each 

entity. The 

five 

or fewer persons, whose 

ownership is considered for purposes of the controlling interest requirement for 

each organization, must be the same persons whose ownership is considered for 

purposes of the effective control requirement. [RAB 1989-48, p 2] 

For brother-sister groups, the examples provide that common ownership exists when “combined 

identical ownership 

. 

. 

. is greater than 50%.” RAB 1989-48, Example 5, p 4. 

In this case, like in Rovas, RAB 1989-48 provides no statutory construction and thus 

there was nothing for the Tax Tribunal to respectfully consider. Therefore, the Tax Tribunal did 

not err by interpreting the plain language of MCL 211.27a(7)(in) and applying general rules of

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

summary disposition 

in favor of petitioner and concluded that respondent had erroneously 

uncapped the taxable value of petitioner’s property under MCL 211.27a. 

Affirmed. 

/sf Colleen A. O’Brien 

/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh 

/s/ Cynthia Diane Stephens

MTT Docket No. 26-002431

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

STATE 

OF MICHIGAN 

COURT 

OF APPEALS 

C & J INVESTMENTS OF GRAYLING, LLC, 

UNPUBLISHED 

November 13, 2007 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v 

No. 

270989 

Tax Tribunal 

CITY OF GRAYLING, 

LC No. 

00-306256 

Respondent-Appellee. 

Before: Talbot, P.J., and Fitzgerald and Kelly, JJ. 

PER CURIAM. 

Petitioner appeals as of right from a Tax Tribunal decision holding that a 2002 transfer of 

two parcels of real property from the Annette E. Carey Revocable Trust to petitioner constituted 

a transfer of ownership under MCL 211.27a(6), thereby allowing the taxable values of the 

properties to be uncapped and reassessed. 

Petitioner contends that reassessment was improper 

because the transfer involved an exempt transaction under MCL 211.27a(7)(1). We affirm. 

The parties agree that petitioner is a legal entity comprised of two members, the Annette 

E. Carey Revocable Trust and Richard Jaskowski, each holding 

a 50 percent interest. 

The 

properties in question were formerly held solely by the trust. 

In 2002, Annette E. Carey, as 

trustee of her trust, and her husband, executed quitclaim deeds conveying the properties to 

petitioner. 

As this Court recently explained in Signature Villas, LLC v City of Ann Arbor, 269 Mich 

App 694, 696-697; 714 NW2d 392 (2006): 

Pursuant to the Michigan Constitution and the GPTA, property may not be 

assessed at more than 50 percent of its “true cash value,” or fair market value. 

Const 1963, art 9, 

§ 3; MCL 211.27a(1). 

Additionally, Const 1963, art 9, 

§ 

3

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

equalized value upon the sale or transfer of the property, Const 1963, art 9, § 3; 

MCL 211.27a(3). 

In this case, the hearing referee determined that the trust and petitioner were not commonly 

controlled entities, and therefore rejected petitioner’s argument that the property transfer was 

exempt from readjustment under MCL 211.27a(7)1). 

This Court’s review of a Tax Tribunal decision is very limited. 

In the absence of an 

allegation of fraud, review is limited to deciding whether the tribunal conumitted an error of law 

or adopted a wrong legal principle. Pheasant Ring v Waterford Twp, 272 Mich App 436, 438; 

726 NW2d 741 (2006). 

Factual findings made by the tribunal will not be disturbed so long as 

they are supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole record. 

Id. 

In 

this case, however, the hearing referee was not required to find any facts because the parties 

stipulated to the relevant facts. 

Resolution of this case also involves a question of statutory interpretation. 

Questions of 

statutory interpretation are reviewed de novo. 

Signature Villas, supra at 699. 

Where statutory 

language is clear and unambiguous, it is enforced as written. 

Jd. 

Petitioner argues that the transfer of the property from the trust to petitioner did not 

involve a “transfer of ownership” within the meaning of MCL 211.27a(6), because the transfer 

fell within the exception set forth in subsection (7)(1) of the statute, which provides: 

Transfer of ownership does not include the following: 

EE 

6) 

A transfer of real property or other ownership interests among 

corporations, 

partnerships, 

limited 

liability 

companies, 

limited 

liability 

partnerships, 

or 

other 

legal 

entities 

if the 

entities 

involved 

are commonly 

controlled. Upon request by the state tax commission, a corporation, partnership, 

limited liability company, limited liability partnership, or other legal entity shall 

furnish proof within 45 days that 

a transfer meets the requirements of this 

subdivision. 

A corporation, partnership, 

limited 

liability company, 

limited 

liability partnership, or other legal entity that fails to comply with a request by the 

state tax commission under this subdivision is subject to a fine of $200.00. 

. 

. 

. 

The exemption in MCL 211.27a(7)(1) applies if (1) the transaction is between legal entities, and 

(2) the legal entities involved are commonly controlled. The parties do not dispute that both the 

trust and petitioner are legal entities. 

Rather, they dispute whether the trust and petitioner are 

“commonly controlled.” MCL 211.27a does not define “commonly controlled.”

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

RAB 

1989-48 

defines three categories 

of groups that can qualify 

as entities under 

common control: 

(1) parent-subsidiary entities under common control; (2) brother-sister entities 

under common control; and (3) a combination of entities under common control. 

First, the trust cannot be considered a parent entity with respect to petitioner because it 

owns only a 50 percent interest in petitioner, which is inadequate to have a controlling interest, 

and petitioner likewise is not a parent entity of the trust. 

Second, the trust and petitioner do not qualify as a “brother-sister group of entities under 

common control.” 

In order to qualify under that category, the same persons must own 

a 

controlling interest 

in each entity. 

Here, the trust does not have 

a controlling interest in 

petitioner and Jaskowski does not have any interest in the trust. 

Third, the trust and petitioner are not 

a “combined group of entities under common 

control.” 

To qualify as a combined group of entities, there must be a group of three or more 

entities. 

Further, the entities must also be engaged in business or trade activity. 

Therefore, 

petitioner and the trust do not fall under this category. 

Petitioner argues that both petitioner and the trust are under the common control of 

Annette Carey. We disagree. 

Even if Carey controls the trust, she does not have control over 

petitioner. 

Her 50 percent interest in petitioner, through the trust, is inadequate to give her a 

controlling interest in petitioner. 

Rather, one must have more than a 50 percent interest to have 

control under RAB 1989-48. 

Petitioner argues that the hearing referee erred by requiring that the entities must be 

involved in business activity and that the transferring entity must have the same interest in the 

properties both before and after the transfer because MCL 211.27a does not impose such a 

requirement. 

The hearing referee noted that RAB 1989-48 provides that the entities at issue in 

the transaction “must be engaged in business activity.” 

Trusts are primarily used to avoid 

probate, manage financial affairs, preserve privacy, or reduce estate taxes. 

The hearing referee 

therefore found that while the trust holds assets, including commercial real estate for investment, 

it is not a legal entity engaged in business activity. 

RAB 1989-48 provides that for the first two categories of groups, the entities involved 

must be engaged in some form of business or trade activities. For the third category of combined 

groups, RAB 1989-48 does not specifically require that the entities involved must be engaged in 

business or trade activities. 

However, the third category consists of a combination of the first 

two categories. Therefore, any groups that qualify under the third category must also satisfy the 

first two categories and, therefore, be engaged in business or trade activities.

MTT Docket No. 26-002431 

implication, id. at 702, we conclude that RAB 1989-48 is not inconsistent with the plain meaning 

of “commonly controlled” in MCL 211.27a(7)(1). 

The term “common” is defined as “belonging equally to, or shared alike by, two or more 

or all in question.” 

Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1997), p 264. 

The term 

“control” means, “to exercise restraint or direction over; dominate, regulate, 

or command.” 

Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1997), p 288. 

In this case, neither petitioner, nor 

its 50-percent member, Jaskowski, has any control over the trust, and the trust does not control 

petitioner. 

Thus, the transfer of property from the trust to petitioner did not involve a transfer 

among entities that are commonly controlled. 

Petitioner also argues that the hearing referee erred by ruling against it for the reason that 

the ownership interests before and after the property transfer had changed. While MCL 211.27a 

does not impose any requirement that ownership interests must be the same both before and after 

the transaction, the hearing referee's analysis and discussion of ownership interests occurred in 

the context of applying MCL 211.27a(7)(l). 

The hearing referee was merely explaining the 

factual basis for her decision. No error has been shown. 

Affirmed. 

/s/ Michael J. Talbot 

/s{ E. Thomas Fitzgerald 

/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly

← View full record