A hearing was held in the above-captioned case on June 29, 2001, to determine whether Petitioner, The Mosaic Foundation (of R & P Heydon), was exempt from ad valorem real property taxation for the 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 tax years on property located at 2394 Winewood, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

 

Petitioner was represented by  Jerold Lax (P16470).

 

Respondent City of Ann Arbor was represented by Kristen D. Larcom (P39550).

 

The subject property consists of real property located at 2394 Winewood, in the City of Ann Arbor, County of Washtenaw.

 

Information relevant to the contested assessments is as follows:

 

 

In this proceeding, AV refers to assessed value, SEV to state equalized value, and TCV to true cash value.

 

 

Witnesses:

 

Petitioner: Peter Heydon

 

 

Respondent:  David Petrak, Durk Ashley, Annette Weber

 

 

EXHIBITS:

 

Petitioner’s Exhibits

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 1- Mosaic Foundation Articles of Incorporation dated December 28, 1989;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 2- Mosaic Foundation 501(c)(3) determination letter dated May 10, 1990;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 3- Warranty Deed dated October 27, 1997;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 4- City of Ann Arbor Application for Property Tax Exemption for tax year 1998 dated December 27, 1997 executed by Petitioner;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 5- Exemption Denial by City of Ann Arbor for 1998, dated January 8, 1998;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 6- City of Ann Arbor Property Information Sheet dated February 16, 1998;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 7- 1998 Appeal to Board of Review;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 8- Board of Review Denial of Appeal dated April 1998;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit # 9- 1997 Charitable Recipients List of Petitioner;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #10-1998 Charitable Recipients List of Petitioner;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #11- Certificate of Occupancy dated December 21, 1999;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #12- Mosaic Feline Refuge Articles of Incorporation dated October 29, 1996;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #13- Mosaic Feline Refuge 501(c)(3) determination letter dated January 17, 1997;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #14- Building Plans;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #15-2001 Board of Review Application and Decision;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #16-1999 List of Charitable Recipients;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #17- Michigan Department of Agriculture letter dated April 9, 2001;

 

Petitioner’s Exhibit #18- Annual Shelter Activity Report for Mosaic Feline Refuge for 2000.

All Petitioner’s exhibits were admitted on stipulation of the parties with the exception of P-16, which was admitted over Respondent’s objection.

 

Respondent’s Exhibits

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #1- Letter dated January 8, 1998 denying 1998 application for   property exemption;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #2- Letter dated January 16, 1998;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #3- Letter dated October 2, 1998;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #4- Copy of Envelope dated December 3, 1998;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #5- Personal Property Statement letter dated March 8, 1999;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #6- Letter dated March 8, 1999, reply letter dated March 12, 1999  and copy of envelope;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #7- Letter and copy of envelope, dated April 7, 1999;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #8- Letter dated April 22, 1999;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #9- Personal Property Statement as of December 31, 1998 and letter dated April 26, 1999 from Petitioner to Respondent;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #10- Petitioner’s Answers to Respondent’s Tax Discovery Request No.1, Petitioner’s Response to Respondent’s Second Set of Interrogatories for Tax Parcel No. 09-30-300-007 (2394 Winewood), Petitioner’s Response  to Respondent’s Third Set of Interrogatories for Tax Parcel No. 09-30-300-007 (2394 Winewood);

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #11- Affidavit of Lois Thompson;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #12- Certificate of Compliance and Occupancy issued December 21, 1999;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #13- Personal Property Statement-2000, dated February 22, 2000;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #14- State of Michigan, Department of Agriculture Animal Protection License issued to Mosaic Feline Refuge dated June 14, 2000;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #15- Various photographs of the interior and exterior of the 2394 Winewood property taken by Respondent’s agents and designated R-15 A through O;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #16- Diagram of Floor Pan, Deck Framing Plan, Schedules-Mosaic Feline Refuge prepared by Mitchell and Mouat Architects, Inc., dated March 8, 1998;

 

Respondent’s Exhibit #17- Memo dated August 10, 1998 and various city approval and  permits for the Mosaic Feline Refuge.

 

 

All Respondent’s exhibits were admitted without objection with the exception of R-11, which was withdrawn by Respondent and not offered.

 

 

PETITIONER’S WITNESS

 

Peter N. Heydon, the original incorporator of The Mosaic Foundation (of R & P Heydon), testified on behalf of Petitioner. 

 

Mr. Heydon indicated that he is a 60 year old individual who holds a Ph.D and for several years was an Adjunct professor at the University of Michigan.   In addition to his position at U of M, the witness stated he has been self employed for several years.  It appears that the witness’s self employment is in the nature of an investor.  He stated that either in the late 1970’s or early 1980’s, he and his wife began to make substantial gifts to charities that they felt deserving both in the Ann Arbor area and nationally.

 

By the late 1980’s, their level of giving had increased to the point that they decided to create their own non-profit corporation from which their gifts to deserving entities could emanate.  On December 27, 1989, the Articles of Incorporation for The Mosaic Foundation (of R. & P. Heydon) were executed and filed with the Michigan Department of Commerce (P-1).  On May 10, 1990, the Foundation received a determination letter from  the Internal Revenue Service that the Foundation qualified as exempt from Federal income tax under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Code.

 

Throughout the early to mid 1990’s, the Foundation, with funds provided by the Heydons, made gifts and grants to a multitude of educational and charitable endeavors.  A sampling of the nature of the Foundations gifts and grants can be found in the 1997 & 1998  list of charitable recipients (P-9 and P-10).  The 1997 list, which totals $463,235.63, included $10,000 to Eastern Michigan University for a Special Education Endowment; $5,350.00  to the Folger Shakespeare Library; $25,000 to the Interlochen  Center of the Arts; $1,000 for Animal Haven, Incorporated; $40,000 to National Public Radio, etc.  The 1998  Charitable Recipient list is similar to 1997 with the following sampling:  African Wildlife Foundation, $2,000; American Horse Trail Foundation, $5,000; Food Gathers, Incorporated, $5,000; Horse’s Have, $5,000;  Humane Society of Huron Valley, $1,000; Wood Green Animal Shelter, $2,500.  The total of the Foundation’s gifts and grants for 1998 totaled $342,942.19.

 

A review of P-9 and P-10 will show that a substantial number of Foundation gifts were made to organizations involved in the care, shelter and humanitarian treatment of various kinds of animals.

 

He testified that for several years, on the 400 acre farm he and his wife own in Washtenaw county, his wife had maintained a non-licensed no kill refuge for cats in one of the party’s barns.  Often, upwards of 60 cats would routinely be cared for. She would attempt to place the cats for adoption and sick cats would be nursed back to health.  No cats would ever be destroyed.  Mrs. Heydon believed that due to the farm  being some distance from metropolitan Ann Arbor, the parties’ endeavors to care for and a place for adoption of felines would be better served by establishing the feline operation in Ann Arbor.

 

Henrietta M. Heydon and Peter N. Heydon established The Mosaic Feline Refuge as a Michigan non-profit corporation  by executing Articles of Incorporation  on October 22, 1996, which were filed with the Michigan Department of Consumer and Industry Services, Corporations Bureau on October 29, 1996. P-12.  On January 17, 1997, The Mosaic Feline Refuge received a determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service that the Foundation qualified as exempt from Federal income tax under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Code. (P-13)

 

Prior to the fall of 1997, all corporate records of the Foundation were maintained either in the Heydon’s home, the office of Peter N. Heydon located at 324 East Washington Street, Ann Arbor, or at the office of the Foundation’s attorney.  Mr. Heydon testified that sometime in 1997 it was determined by the board of directors of the Foundation (P and H Heydon) to purchase a building to house the Foundation’s records and from which the Foundation would operate, together with locating The Mosaic Feline Refuge on site.

 

On October 27, 1997, the Foundation purchased the property located at 2394 Winewood, Ann Arbor, for the sum of $270,000.  Located on the property is a building of approximately 5000 square feet.  An architect was engaged prior to the actual purchase to redesign the building to accommodate both the Mosaic Foundation and the Feline Refuge.

 

Mr. Heydon further testified that shortly after the acquisition of the property the corporate records of the Foundation were moved onto the property together with various building materials that were to be used to begin to  retrofitting the building to house the Mosaic Feline Refuge.  In anticipation of starting construction on the building, Heydon obtained a Michigan builders license so that he could act as the general contractor and thus save money on the project.  Preliminary drawings were prepared dated December 11, 1997. (P-14)

 

Heydon indicated that on December 31, 1997 the Foundation’s business records, a two- drawer  file cabinet, a couple of chairs, a typewriter, typewriter stand and a telephone that had been installed on the site, together with some building materials to begin renovation of that portion of the structure that would be occupied by the Feline Refuge, were moved onto the property.

 

Heydon testified that after the acquisition of the property, the board of directors of the Foundation conducted all of their meetings on site together with its day to day operations, which included discussions  on recipients of the Foundation’s gifts and grants.  At no time was the property occupied by anyone or any entity other than Petitioner or the Mosaic Feline refuge after completion of the remodeling of that portion of the structure being occupied by the Refuge. At no time have any salaries been paid to Heydon or Mrs. Heydon and  any additional labor performed at the Feline Refuge is done by volunteers.

 

Heydon related that construction on the building was finally completed on December 21, 1999.  Respondent issued a Certificate of Compliance and Occupancy. ( R-12)  He further testified that the first cat began to occupy the Refuge in early March of 2000.

 

 

 

 

RESPONDENT’S  WITNESSES’

 

David Petrak, Chief Appraiser for the City of Ann Arbor Assessor’s Office, testified that on nine occasions commencing on January 6, 1998 he visited the  2394 Winewood property.  On January 6, 1998 he arrived at the property, took pictures (R-15 D and E), knocked on the door, and received no answer; on April  21, 1999 he observed through a window, new block walls, new stud walls, crates with files, and a small amount of furniture. In addition, he observed a couple of construction vehicles in the back parking lot; on his December 17, 1999 visit he observed that  the front portion of the building had been converted to office space, no more equipment present and that the building was not open for business; on January 18, 2000 at approximately 2:40 PM, Petrak observed no vehicles in the parking lots nor any answer to his knock on the door; his February 11 and May 8, 2000 visits to the property resulted in him observing no vehicles at the site nor answers to his knocks on the door; May 23, 2000, two tradesmen were observed at the site but the structure was not open; January 14, 2001, no one present, observed sign near front door which stated “hours by prior arrangement only”; June 15, 2001, van parked in back but no response to a knock on the door.

 

Annette Weber, personal property technician for the Ann Arbor Assessor’s office, testified that she first went to the Winewood site on November 14, 1997, observed a sign which stated “Equipment Supply” and did not have an opportunity to observe the contents of the building, if any.  Her second visit to the property was on October 22, 1998; the building appeared to be vacant and no one was around. On April 21, 1999 she observed construction going on, desk, crates, typewriter and some art work when she looked in the window. The October 27, 1999  visit to the site resulted in Weber finding the doors locked, no vehicles in the parking lots and paper over the windows.  On her last three visits to the property, December 31, 1999, September 29, 2000 and December 29, 2000, she testified that the doors were locked, no vehicles in the parking lots and she couldn’t see into the interior of the structure from the outside.

 

Durk Ashley, assessor, for the City of Ann Arbor, testified that on February 29, 2000 he went to the Winewood property at 1:30 PM. Tthe doors where closed, no cars in the parking lot and there was no response to his knock on the door.

 

On March 23, 2001 Ashley, together with the Ann Arbor board of review, inspected the premises with Peter Heydon.  The inspection had been prearranged and when the group arrived, Mr. Heydon unlocked the building.  The witness observed no employees or other individuals present.  He observed “a lot of cats” present in the shelter portion of the premises.  Some of the cats were housed in cages (R-15F) and some cats were in an area specified on the drawings as “cat shelter area 2.”  (R-15G).  Ashley further testified to the contents of what have been described as the Mosaic feline office (R-15K), the Mosaic feline reception area (R-15L), the Mosaic Foundation office; (R-15M) office #2 (R-15N) and finally the waiting area (R-15O).

 

Ashley testified that the reasons for the denial of Petitioner’s request for exemption were for:  1998, 1999 and 2000 that the property was not being occupied and for 2001 although the property was being occupied, that he was not sure of the charitable nature of the occupancy and that the Board of Review had “deferred to City Attorney and MTT to whether use is  considered charitable. Deferred for  negotiations with attorney.” (see P-15)

 

 

PETITIONER’S CONTENTIONS

 

Petitioner contends that the subject property is exempt from taxation under MCL 211.7o(1) because Petitioner is a nonprofit charitable institution that owns and occupies real property and, to the extent that it does not occupy the entire subject property, the portion of the property that it does not occupy is made available to another nonprofit charitable institution (Mosaic Feline Refuge) to occupy solely for the purposes for which it was organized and thus exempt from taxation under MCL 211.7o(2).

 

RESPONDENT’S CONTENTIONS

 

Respondent contends that Petitioner does not meet the exemption requirements under either section of the statute in that for tax years 1998, 1999 and 2000 Petitioner did not occupy the property and for tax year 2001, although the property was being occupied, the nature of the occupancy did not meet the charitable purpose requirement of MCL 211.7o.

 

 

 

ISSUES AND APPLICABLE LAW

 

The issues to be resolved are:

(1)    Has the subject property been owned, occupied and used solely for the purposes for which Petitioner or Petitioner’s tenant were incorporated on the relevant tax days?

(2)    Are Petitioner and Petitioner’s tenant charitable institutions for purposes of tax exempt status under MCL 211.7o?

 

 

 

“In Michigan, exemptions from taxation are to be strictly construed in favor of the taxing unit.”  Ladies Literary Club v Grand Rapids, 409 Mich 748; 298 NW2d 422 (1980).  Therefore, it is Petitioner’s burden of proof to establish facts and evidence to support its position that the requirements for an exemption have been met.

 

 

MCL 211.7o provides in part:

 

(1)                          Property owned and occupied by a nonprofit charitable institution, while occupied by that nonprofit charitable institution solely for the purposes for which it was incorporated is exempt for the collection of taxes under this act.

(2)        Real and personal property owned by a nonprofit charitable institution or charitable trust that is leased, loaned, or otherwise made available to another nonprofit charitable institution,… solely for the purposes for which that nonprofit charitable institution that would be exempt from taxes collected under this act if the real or personal property were occupied by the lessor nonprofit charitable institution or charitable trust solely for the purposes for which the lessor charitable nonprofit institution  was organized …is exempt from the collection of taxes under this act.

 

The Supreme Court of Michigan in Engineering Society of Detroit v Detroit, 308 Mich 539 (1044), established a four-part test to determine whether a taxpayer would qualify for the MCL 211.7o statutory exemption.  The test provides:

(1)    The real estate must be owned and occupied by the exemption claimant;

(2)    The exemption claimant must be a library, benevolent, charitable, educational or scientific institution;

(3)    The claimant must be incorporated under the laws of this state;

(4)    The exemption exists only when the buildings and other property thereon are occupied by the claimant solely for the purposes for which it incorporated.

 

Requirement #3 has been eliminated by McCormick Foundation v Wawatam Township, 186 Mich App 511 (1990), which found the requirement to be unconstitutional.

 

A “charity” as described in §211.7o has been defined in Retirement Homes v Sylvan Township, 416 Mich 340; 330 NW2d 682 (1982) as:

 

Charity …(is) a gift, to be applied consistently with existing laws, for the benefit of an indefinite number of persons, either by bringing their minds or hearts under the influence of education or religion or relieving their bodies of disease, suffering or constraint, by assisting them to establish themselves for life, or by erecting or maintaining public buildings or works or otherwise lessening the burdens of government.  416 Mich at 348-349.

 

 

An entity’s 501(c)(3) status is not a determining factor for exemption from Michigan property taxes, In American Concrete Institute v State Tax Commission, 12 Mich App 595; 163 NW2d 508 (1968), the court held:

 

The institute’s income tax status does not affect or predetermine the taxable status of its property under the Michigan general property tax law, as it contends.  The institute’s exemption from Michigan ad valorem tax is not determinable by its qualifications as an organization exempt from income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1954, but by the much more strict provisions of the Michigan general property tax act, supra, sections 7 and 9. A reading of the language of these two provisions (Federal and State), clearly demonstrates the difference.  The institute’s services are principally for its members, which eventually will benefit the public, but are not the kind of services to the general public which are contemplated by the legislature enactment for tax exemption.

 

MCL 211.53d(2) provides:

For taxes levied after December 31, 1997, the assessment roll for each tax year shall be corrected to reflect that improvements to real property assessed on that tax roll as partially completed new construction and the land on which the improvements are located are exempt from the collection of taxes under this act if the improvements and the land on which the improvements are located are determined to be exempt from taxes collected under this act on tax day in the year construction of the improvements was completed and the property put to use.

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT

 

 

The Mosaic Foundation (of R. and P. Heydon) was incorporated as a Michigan Nonprofit corporation on December 28, 1989 effective January 1, 1990 for the purpose of:

 

(a)       to receive and maintain funds of either real or personal property, or both and (b) subject to the restrictions and limitations herein set forth, to use and apply the whole or any part of the income and principal from such funds exclusively for charitable, scientific, civic, moral, literary, cultural, social, or educational purposes in such manner as will in the discretion of the Board of Directors best promote and enhance the general welfare without discrimination as to race color or creed.  The use and application of such income and principal may, in the discretion of the Board of Directors, be done directly by the Corporation or indirectly through contributions by the Corporation to other organizations formed for charitable, scientific, civic, moral, literary, cultural, social or educational purposes.  However, no part of such income or principal shall be contributed to any organization whose net earnings, or any part hereof, inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual or any substantial part of the activities of which is to carry on propaganda, or otherwise attempt to influence legislation.  Moreover, no part of such income or principal shall be appropriated or applied to or for any religious purpose (except as may specifically be designated by the terms of a gift or other instrument by which the corporation receives the funds or assets.)

 

Petitioner applied for and received recognition from the Internal Revenue Service on May 10, 1990 that it qualified as an organization described under 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.

 

Mosaic Feline Refuge was incorporated as a Michigan Nonprofit corporation on October 29, 1996 with an effective date of November 1, 1996 for the purpose of:

 

…to provide and to encourage others to assist in providing care and shelter for lost, abandoned or unwanted felines and, to that end, to do the following: (a) to establish and maintain a temporary or permanent home for felines placed in the custody of the corporation; (b) to develop and implement a program for the temporary and permanent placement in suitable homes for felines placed in the custody of the corporation; (c) to provide care and sustenance for felines placed in the custody of the corporation; (d) to further the interest in felines by educating others regarding their care, treatment and welfare; (e) to conduct and promote the study of the problems of felines with the objective of stimulating public concern and attention to those problems by means of conferences, study groups, publications and similar educational means; and (f) to exercise all other powers and privileges accorded to nonprofit corporations in the State of Michigan to the extent necessary or appropriate to achieve the purpose specified above.

 

Mosaic Feline Refuge applied for and received recognition from the Internal Revenue Service on January 17, 1997 that it qualified as an organization described under 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.

 

Petitioner took title to the subject property on October 27, 1997 by way of warranty deed, which deed was recorded in the office of the Washtenaw Register of Deeds on November 6, 1997 in Liber 03529 Page 0145.

 

The subject property is owned by the exemption claimant.

 

 

In this matter on all relevant tax days in question, the undisputed evidence presented at the hearing establishes that Petitioner and no one else occupied  the property in question until sometime in early 2000 when the retrofitting of the property was complete and the Mosaic Feline Refuge took occupancy of a substantial part of the structure for its corporate purposes and the purposes that it was incorporated for.

 

It is also undisputed, and the Tribunal so finds,  that Petitioner’s use of the premises as contrasted to occupancy  from the date of acquiring title until completion of the retrofitting for the Feline Refuge consisted of storing corporate records, a small amount of office equipment and files and  holding an occasional board of directors meeting in a relatively small percentage of the total space of the building.  The storing of records, holding of board of directors meetings, possession and use of office equipment and files is an integral part of  the furtherance of Petitioner’s corporate purpose.

 

The Tribunal finds that Petitioner’s charitable activities as shown in P-9, P-10 and P-16 establish that it acted in accordance with its stated corporate purpose:

The use and application of such income and principal may, in the discretion of the Board of Directors, be done directly by the Corporation or indirectly through contributions by the Corporation to other organizations formed for charitable, scientific, civic, moral, literary, cultural, social or educational purposes. 

 

It appears that all of the activities of Petitioner were directed to organizations organized in their own right as library, benevolent, charitable, educational or scientific institutions.

 

It is further found that Petitioner is a nonprofit charitable institution.

 

Mosaic Feline Refuge took occupancy of that portion of the building dedicated to its use during 2000, which was the year that construction of the retrofitting (improvements) of the building was completed and cages and other equipment necessary for the operation of the Refuge was installed and the Refuge received its Michigan Department of Agriculture Animal Protection License (R-14).  The License is necessary for the Refuge to operate legally.

Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing and in accordance with the definition of “charity” set forth in Retirement homes v Sylvan Township, the Tribunal finds that the Mosaic Feline Refuge is nonprofit charitable institution, which has occupied a portion of the subject property since completion of the retrofitting and exclusively for the purposes of its incorporation, and that its activities consisted of establishing a temporary or permanent home for cats in its custody, the development and implementation of a program for temporary and permanent placement in suitable homes of felines placed in custody of the Refuge.[1]

In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal finds that providing for the care and shelter of lost, abandoned or unwanted felines lessens the general burdens and responsibilities of government.

 

 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

 

MCL 211.7o(1) provides that property owned and occupied by a nonprofit charitable institution while occupied by the nonprofit charitable institution solely for the purposes for which it was incorporated is exempt from the collection of taxes under this act.  Petitioner qualifies under 211.7o(1) as a charitable institution and as defined  in Retirement Homes v Sylvan Township, supra.

The Tribunal’s finding that the property is exempt from taxation can be based upon either of two theories, both of which Petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence. First:  That Petitioner’s has  owned, occupied and used the property in question on each of the relevant tax days solely for the purposes that it was incorporated.  Second:  That Petitioner owned, but only occupied and used a portion of the premises while the balance was being retrofitted to house the Mosaic Feline Refuse and due to the fact that MCL 211.53d(2) allows for the correction of assessment rolls to re3flect that improvements to real property assessed on that tax roll as partially completed new construction and the land on which improvements are located construction are determined to be exempt from taxes collected under the Act on the tax day in the year construction of the improvements was completed and property put to use.  Since the Tribunal has found that the Mosaic Feline Refuse is a valid charitable institution under MCL 211.7o(1) and by virtue of MCL 211.7o(2), Petitioner does not lose the exemption afforded under 211.7o(1) if a portion of the property is leased, loaned, or otherwise made available to another nonprofit charitable institution.

 

JUDGMENT

 

IT IS ORDERED that the persons having responsibility for the assessment roll  for the tax years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 shall correct or cause the assessment rolls to be corrected to reflect that Parcel # 09-30-300-007 is EXEMPT from taxation under MCL 211.7(o) within 21 days of the date of entry of this order as follows:

 

In this proceeding, AV refers to assessed value, SEV to state equalized value, and TCV to true cash value.

 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with collecting or refunding the affected taxes shall collect taxes, any applicable interest, or issue a refund within 21 days after the entry of this order. If a refund is warranted, it shall include a proportionate share of any property tax administration fees paid and of penalty and interest paid on delinquent taxes. A sum determined, by the Tribunal, to have been unlawfully paid shall bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and the judgment shall bear interest to the date of its payment. A sum determined by the Tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 days after the issuance of the Tribunal’s decision.  Pursuant to Pursuant to 1995 PA 232, interest shall accrue (i) after December 31, 1995, at a rate of 6.55% for calendar year 1996, (ii) after December 31, 1996, at a rate of 6.11% for calendar year 1997, (iii) after December 31, 1997, at a rate of 6.04% for calendar year 1998, (iv) after December 31, 1998, at a rate of 6.01% for calendar year 1999, (v) after December 31, 1999, at a rate of 5.49% for calendar year 2000, and after December 31, 2000, at a rate of 6.56% for calendar year 2001.

                                                  MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 Entered:  08/28/2001 

By: Kimbal R. Smith III, Tribunal Judge