WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 9958

Allows municipalities to relieve property owners of penalties due to lack of payment if such property owner was a victim of property tax fraud

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Pat Fahy

Allows local governments to forgive or reduce interest and penalties on delinquent property taxes if the owner was a victim of property tax fraud, with documentation and limits.

REFERRED TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 9958

Summary of Bill S. 9958 (New York, 2025-2026 Session)

Title

Allows municipalities to relieve property owners of penalties and interest due to lack of payment if the owner was a victim of property tax fraud.

Purpose and Intent

  • Create a mechanism for local tax districts to forgive or reduce interest and penalties on delinquent property tax payments when the delinquency is caused by, or directly related to, property tax fraud against the owner.
  • Provide a targeted remedy to victims of property tax fraud (e.g., check fraud, mail theft, interception, or unauthorized receipt of a tax payment).

Key Provisions

Section 924-c (New addition to Real Property Tax Law)

  • Local governing bodies may, by resolution, authorize enforcing officers to cancel, in whole or in part, interest and penalties on a parcel where the owner proves they were a victim of property tax fraud in connection with a tax payment.
  • Basis for relief can be on a general policy or on a case-by-case basis.
  • Documentation to prove fraud may include:
    • An affidavit describing the fraud incident
    • Documentation from a financial institution (e.g., evidence of fraud and reimbursement of funds)
    • Police report or other evidence of fraud
  • Relief is limited to the period of delinquency attributable to the tax fraud and cannot exceed one year from the date taxes were due.
  • Consent requirement: If the portion of interest/penalties would have otherwise gone to a municipal corporation, the relief cannot be granted without the municipal corporation’s consent. Consent can be given on a case-by-case basis or generally via local law/resolution after a public hearing.
  • The state commissioner may issue rules to implement the section, including standards for documentation, procedures, and enforcement guidance.

Section 1182 (Amendment to existing law)

  • Confirms that tax districts may authorize cancellation or reduction of interest, penalties, or other charges by resolution, but requires municipal consent if those charges would go to a municipal corporation.
  • Explicitly allows the waiver authority for victims of property tax fraud under proposed § 924-c to be granted on a general basis as described in § 924-c.

Who is Affected

  • Property owners who are victims of property tax fraud (e.g., check fraud, mail theft, interception of tax payments) and face delinquency penalties.
  • Tax districts (counties/municipalities) that administer property taxes and issue penalties/interest.
  • Municipal corporations that may receive portions of penalties/interest and must consent to relief where applicable.
  • Enforcing officers responsible for assessing and applying penalties.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Effective Date: Immediate upon enactment.
  • Process:
    • Local governing body can pass a resolution authorizing relief (general or case-by-case basis).
    • Property owner must provide required documentation to prove fraud.
    • Relief applies only to the delinquency caused by fraud and capped at one year from due date.
    • If funds would have gone to a municipal entity, consent from that municipal corporation is required (can be granted by case-by-case action or general resolution after a public hearing).
  • Regulatory Framework: The state Commissioner may promulgate implementing rules and standards.

Potential Impacts and Considerations

  • Administrative: Local governments gain a structured process to address fraud-related delinquencies, potentially reducing financial hardship for victims.
  • Financial: Possible reduction of revenue from canceled interest/penalties; consent requirements protect municipal revenue interests.
  • Legal/Procedural: Adds a fraud-specific carve-out to existing authority to forgive penalties; relies on documented proof and often a public hearing for broad waivers.
  • Access: Emphasizes transparency and due process through required documentation and potential public hearings for broad waivers.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with current law (Section 1182) and a hypothetical example illustrating how a fraud scenario might be handled under the new §924-c.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.