DocketNumber: A95A1161
Judges: McMurray
Filed Date: 11/15/1995
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/8/2024
Jerry C. Averett and Rebecca Averett filed an action against
Upon opposing motions for summary judgment, the parties stipulated that Troup County’s Tax Commissioner “bulk mailed tax notices and bills to property owners, including the [Averetts], on October 22, 1991 [; that all] the tax bills mailed to the [Averetts] stated on their face that they were due and payable in full by December 23, 1991 [; that the tax] notices mailed by the office of the Tax Commissioner, Troup County, including the tax bills mailed to the [Averetts], did not contain a postmark on the individual envelopes [, but that] the bulk mailing receipt provided to the Tax Commissioner is dated October 22, 1991.” According to the trial court’s finding, the Averetts “stipulated they received all tax bills prior to December 23, 1993.”
The trial court denied the Averetts’ motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment in favor of Troup County. This appeal followed. Held:
The Averetts contend Troup County did not have authority to assess them with interest or impose a ten percent penalty, as authorized by OCGA § 48-2-44 (b) (1) when taxes are more than 90 days past due, because the tax notices they received from Troup County did not each bear a postmark as required by OCGA § 48-5-148 (a) (3). Specifically, the Averetts claim that such postmarks are a condition precedent to the accrual of interest on unpaid taxes, reasoning that “[t]he purpose of the postmark is to provide the taxpayer with notice of not only when the taxes are due, but by when they must be paid to avoid the imposition of interest or penalties.” These assertions are without merit.
OCGA § 48-5-148 (a) (3) does not require postmarks on tax bills or notices mailed out by the county, nor are such postmarks a condition precedent to the accrual of interest on past-due ad valorem taxes. Further, OCGA § 48-5-148 (a) (3) neither defines the postmark as a device for computing the due date for ad valorem taxes, nor refers to the postmark as a device for conveying notice to taxpayers of the date
The trial court did not err in denying the Averetts’ motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment in favor of Troup County.
Judgment affirmed.
Indeed, taxpayers are presumed to know that, “[e]xcept as otherwise expressly provided for by law, ad valorem taxes due the state or any county remaining unpaid on December 20 in each year shall bear interest at the rate specified in OCGA § 48-2-40[, i.e., one percent per month,] from December 20. . . .” OCGA § 48-5-148 (a) (1). See Puckett Paving Co. v. Carrier Leasing Corp., 236 Ga. 891, 892 (225 SE2d 910). And it appears that accrual of interest from this due date will only be suspended when the county fails to post tax notices 60 days before December 20, assuming that a period of less than 60 days has not been provided for by law. OCGA § 48-5-148 (a) (3). See Unofficial Opinions of the Georgia Attorney General, Michael J. Bowers, 1982, p. 253, U82-19 at p. 254. Of course, any loss of interest resulting from such belated mailings may constitute evidence reflecting on the county collector’s liability under OCGA § 48-5-152.