Protection of personal information from the Michigan Tax Tribunal’s (MTT) public database; Redactions; Poverty exemption on a principal residence; Spranger v Warren; MCL 211.7u(4); Finding that retirement accounts constituted liquid assets

Determining that several of petitioner-Gong’s arguments in this poverty exemption case were abandoned, the court rejected her claims that the MTT erred in (1) denying her “motions to protect her personal identifiable and confidential information” and (2) determining “that retirement accounts constituted liquid assets.” In this consolidated appeal, she appealed (1) the MTT’s “orders denying reconsideration of the previous orders denying Gong’s request to protect her personal identifiable and confidential information from the MTT public database” and (2) the MTT’s “final opinion and judgment denying her 2023 exemption claim.” As to the personal information issue, the court found that “Gong’s general allegation—that the redactions made in this case were not thorough enough—lacks merit.” It noted that she now asserted that before performing any redactions, the MTT “immediately released all evidence submitted by” respondent-township. But this argument was “unfounded because: (1) there is no evidence proving this allegation, and (2) it directly contradicts Gong’s position before the” MTT. The court concluded that the MTT “did not err by redacting the township’s evidence under Mich. Admin. Code, R. 792.10203(h) and MCR 1.109(D)(9)(a). After a thorough review of the records in this case,” it determined that, generally, the redactions made were in alignment with the MTT’s orders, but it remanded “for the ministerial task of redacting the remaining financial account numbers—in accordance with Mich. Admin. Code, R. 792.10203(h) and MCR 1.109(D)(9)(a)(v)—from the” MTT’s evidence in one case. The court also found no merit in Gong’s general allegations that a retirement account cannot be considered a liquid asset. Evidence showed that she had investment and retirement accounts and self-managed accounts. “Because Gong could choose to withdraw money from these accounts at any time, albeit with a penalty fee, the [MTT] did not err by determining that the township’s poverty exemption guidelines included retirement accounts as liquid assets.” It added that, under the township’s poverty exemption guidelines, “assets outside of the wide, listed array, such as retirement accounts, may also constitute liquid assets.” Affirmed but remanded.