State ex rel. Algoma Housing Co. v. Board of Review
In State ex rel. Algoma Housing Co. v. Board of Review, 166 Wis. 2d 675, 480 N.W.2d 786 (Ct. App. 1991), the Court rejected the taxpayer's argument that in arriving at the fair market value of section 8 federally subsidized low-income housing property, the actual purchase price for the real estate should be reduced because of the rental restrictions.
The Court concluded the rental restrictions were already reflected in the purchase price in the arms-length sale and that was the best indicator of fair market value. Algoma Housing, 166 Wis. 2d at 679-681.
Although tax credits were involved in that property, there was one purchase price for them and a separate purchase price for the real estate, see id. at 678, and it was the purchase price for the real estate that the taxpayer sought to have reduced.
There was no argument that the value of the tax credits should be included in assessing the real estate, and that issue was never addressed.