Preview:

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Stephen Carter Attorney General of Indiana John Snethen Deputy Attorney General Andrew W. Swain Section Chief, Tax Section Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Jeffrey T. Bennett Bradley D. Hasler Indianapolis, Indiana

________________________________________________________________________

In the

Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________ No. 49S10-0609-TA-336 DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE, Appellant (Respondent below), v. ROLLER SKATING RINK OPERATORS ASSOCIATION D/B/A ROLLER SKATING ASSOCIATION, Appellee (Petitioner below). _________________________________ Appeal from the Indiana Tax Court, No. 49T10-0108-TA-76 The Honorable Thomas G. Fisher, Judge _________________________________ On Petition for Review _________________________________ September 22, 2006 Boehm, Justice. We hold that programs of a trade association directed to the development of the private businesses of its members, though "educational" in some sense, do not qualify for property tax exemption as educational activities.

Facts and Procedural History Roller Skating Rink Operators Association ("RSA") is a nonprofit corporation that operates Roller Skating University ("RSU"), which provides classes to roller skating rink operators and owners. RSA sought an educational purpose exemption for its office building The exemption application stated that RSA's purpose is

and storage building for tax year 2000.

to "inform, educate and foster the professional development of [its] members (roller skating rink owners and coaches)." At the hearing before the State Board, RSA presented evidence that at RSA's annual convention and trade show RSU presents a day long program consisting of two of the thirteen "modules" RSU has designed to provide professional development education to roller rink owners and operators. The programs are presented at various places, and the exemption is

claimed on the ground that the materials for the programs are developed and stored in the two buildings in question. The RSU curriculum includes study of hospitality, merchandising,

customer service, personnel management, event planning and promotion, contracts and negotiations, risk management and legal issues, budgeting and finance, and advertising. RSU

was developed with the assistance of professors in recreational management at Mount Clare State University in New Jersey and the University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse. Participants receive

a certificate for completion of each module and a diploma upon completion of all thirteen modules. They can receive continuing education credits at the University of Wisconsin. Robin Brown, RSA's Executive Director, testified that RSA's primary purpose is to provide education to its members. A separate organization, USA Roller Skating, provides social and recreational activities for skaters. RSA's "Mission Statement" states that RSA is "a trade

association that serves skating center owner/operators . . . [and that] seeks to inform, educate and foster the professional development of its members, create opportunities for networking and promote roller-skating as a lifetime sport and safe recreational activity." In addition to RSU,

RSA conducts less formal seminars at its annual convention on topics such as estate planning, marketing, cultural diversity, and facility maintenance and security. for rink operators and coaches during a fall trade show. RSA also provides clinics

Brown testified that RSU is not

2

accredited, but in her view the recreational management and business education offered through RSU is equivalent to that offered at Indiana's state universities and colleges. The Marion County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals ("PTABOA") denied the exemption. RSA appealed to the State Board of Tax Commissioners which upheld PTABOA's denial, concluding that the primary purpose of RSA is to promote the businesses of the rink owners and operators and that any educational training is "merely incidental" to the promotional activities of the organization. The Tax Court reversed in an unpublished decision, concluding that RSA's property was predominantly used for educational purposes and that RSA's use of the property was reasonably necessary to further its purpose of providing education. I. Challenge to Timeliness of Filing of Petition The Department of Local Government Finance ("DLGF") 1 argues that RSA failed to file a timely petition in the Tax Court and that this failure deprived the Tax Court of subject matter jurisdiction. The parties dispute when RSA was required to file its petition and also disagree about whether the timing of filing of an appeal in the Tax Court implicates subject matter jurisdiction or jurisdiction over the particular case. This issue is raised for the first time in DLGF's petition for review by this Court. In Packard v. Shoopman, 852 N.E.2d 927 (Ind. 2006), we held that an objection based on a petitioner's failure to file a timely petition in the Tax Court is waived if not raised in the Tax Court in the first response to the petition. In Shoopman the late filing was raised by the party in the Tax Court some two years after the case had been pending in the Tax Court. In this case DLGF raised no objection to timeliness in the Tax Court. Failure to raise the issue altogether is, of course, a greater procedural default than raising it belatedly. Accordingly, DLGF waived its objection to timeliness by failing to raise the objection in the Tax Court. II. Property Exempt from Taxation for Educational Purposes Article X, Section 1 of the Indiana Constitution requires a "uniform and equal rate of property assessment and taxation" for all real and personal property in Indiana but permits the
1

Effective January 1, 2002, the State Board was replaced by the DLGF. The DLGF was substituted for the State Board in this appeal.

3

General Assembly to exempt property used for "municipal, educational, literary, scientific, religious or charitable purposes." Pursuant to this constitutional authority, the legislature enacted Indiana Code section 6-1.1-10-16(a), which provides that "[a]ll or part of a building is exempt from property taxation if it is owned, occupied, and used . . . for educational, literary, scientific, religious, or charitable purposes." This exemption also extends to land on which the exempt building is situated and to personal property that is contained within the building. See Ind. Code

Download Dept. of Local Government Finance v. Roller Skating Rink Operators Assoc. d/b/a

Indiana Law