A greenhouse that could be disassembled and moved was taxable realty not excludable as equipment to be used in a manufacturing or industrial establishment, the Commonwealth Court has held in an apparent issue of first impression.
In approving a trial court decision that affirmed a Bedford County assessment and revision board ruling, a Commonwealth Court majority determined that a greenhouse sunk two feet into the ground and used in a nursery business was subject to real estate assessment and taxation as an improvement to owner Robert S. Custer’s property. The greenhouse did not fall within a taxation exclusion covering machinery and other equipment contained in a mill, mine, manufacturing or industrial establishment because Custer’s nursery business was an agricultural rather than industrial concern, the two-judge majority concluded in Custer v. Bedford Cty. Board of Assessment and Revision of Taxes, PICS Case No. 06-1521 (Pa. Commw. Nov. 2, 2006) Pellegrini, J.; Kelley, S.J., dissenting (15 pages).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
