2001 Practitioners' Questions and Answers

Board of Appeals

Note: The answers by the Department of Revenue to the questions below are not to be relied upon by taxpayers in lieu of a Private Letter Ruling and are not the kind of written information upon which a taxpayer may rely to request an abatement under the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Where a conflict appears to exist between these answers and a form, instruction, regulation or bulletin issued by the Department, taxpayers are advised to follow the form, instruction, regulation or bulletin, contact the Department's Business Hotline at (217) 524-4772, or seek a Private Letter Ruling.


1.	Board of Appeals. As a matter of statutory law, Illinois has one of the most enlightened systems for administering "equity" to taxpayers. But, there's a sense in the practitioner community that the Board is not granting substantial relief, and the Board's practice of reporting that taxpayers received "some" relief in 98% of cases is not meaningful. How many cases in last year were there in which the taxpayer received 90% or more of what was requested? What about figures showing aggregate dollars of relief claimed versus dollars of relief granted? Are there kinds of cases, if there are any patterns, in which the Board fairly consistently refuses to grant relief?
	Response:	At present, the Board lacks the necessary computer software to generate statistics as to the number of cases in which taxpayers received 90% or more of what was requested, or aggregate dollars of relief claimed versus dollars of relief granted. During the next year, the Board will begin using updated docketing and tracking software. The new software may give us the report writing capabilities to generate the types of statistics requested by the questioner. However, it should be noted that Board of Appeals decisions are not, and should not be, motivated by concerns about statistics involving relief granted. The Board decides individual cases on an individual basis based upon the information presented by petitioners in those individual cases. It would be manifestly unfair to let statistics affect relief granted in particular cases. There are no particular types of cases or patterns of cases in which the Board fairly consistently refuses to grant relief.