“Good Faith Negotiations” by Ryan Law Attorney, Jeffrey Scheese
February 19, 2026
Introduction
When a property tax assessment dispute advances from the county level to the superior court, many taxpayers understandably focus on the litigation ahead. Yet before the case proceeds further, Georgia law requires something less adversarial, and potentially far more consequential, a settlement conference. Although this conference may appear to be a routine procedural step, it carries meaningful legal consequences. In particular, the taxpayer’s obligation to participate in “good faith” is not merely aspirational as it directly affects financial protections available during the appeal.
The analysis below explains the statutory framework governing these settlement conferences, the legal meaning of “good faith” under Georgia law, and the practical standards that taxpayers and practitioners should observe to protect their interests and preserve statutory benefits.
Good Faith Requirement in Property Tax Assessment Appeals
When a taxpayer, or their authorized representative, appeals a decision of a county board of equalization, hearing officer, or arbitrator to the superior court, the governing county is statutorily required under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-311(g)(2) to convene a settlement conference. The purpose of this conference is to provide the parties with an opportunity to resolve the dispute without proceeding into full litigation. Participation in this conference is not merely procedural as it carries significant implications for the taxpayer.
Georgia law expressly conditions certain protections and benefits on the taxpayer’s good-faith participation in the settlement process. A taxpayer who fails to confer in good faith may (1) forfeit the temporary reduction in taxes otherwise available while the appeal is pending, and (2) become ineligible to recover attorney’s fees or litigation costs in connection with the superior court appeal. Accordingly, it is essential that taxpayers and practitioners understand what constitutes “good faith” within this statutory framework.
At present, neither the Supreme Court of Georgia nor the Georgia Court of Appeals has issued a decision directly interpreting the good-faith requirement in the context of property tax appeals under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-311(g)(2). Nevertheless, Georgia courts have long articulated the meaning of “good faith” in analogous contexts. In Rigby v. Boatright, 330 Ga. App. 181, 185 (2014), the Court of Appeals explained that the concept of good faith “encompasses basic notions of fairness and commercial reasonableness.” The court further noted that a decision made “for arbitrary or capricious reasons,” or one “predicated on dishonesty or illegality,” does not satisfy the good-faith standard. These principles collectively demonstrate that good faith requires honesty of purpose, reasoned evaluation of relevant information, and the avoidance of positions lacking rational or evidentiary support. Importantly, negotiating in good faith does not obligate a party to concede beyond what the available facts justify.
When applied to settlement conferences conducted under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-311(g)(2), these principles establish clear expectations for taxpayers and counties alike. A party acts in good faith when they approach valuation discussions with a willingness to engage meaningfully with factual data and recognized appraisal methodologies. Good-faith participation typically includes: (1) Presenting competent supporting evidence, such as market-based sales comparisons, cost-approach analyses, or income-capitalization data; (2) Responding reasonably to substantiated proposals offered by the opposing party; and (3) Avoiding unsupported or arbitrary valuation positions that lack grounding in objective evidence or professional appraisal standards.
Conversely, conduct inconsistent with good faith may include insisting on valuation figures that are untethered to evidence, refusing to consider material factual information, or employing delay tactics aimed at obstructing rather than facilitating a resolution.
Good-faith negotiations under O.C.G.A. § 48-5-311(g)(2) are both a statutory obligation and a practical cornerstone of efficient tax-appeal administration. Taxpayers and representatives are best positioned for favorable outcomes when they prepare thoroughly, support their positions with credible documentation, and engage constructively with the county’s analysis. Adhering to these principles not only promotes fairness and accuracy in the valuation process but also helps taxpayers preserve important statutory benefits such as temporary tax reductions and potential recovery of attorney’s fees or litigation costs.
Conclusion
In Georgia property tax appeals, the settlement conference is more than a procedural waypoint on the path to court. It is a legally significant stage at which a taxpayer’s conduct can materially affect both financial exposure and litigation rights. “Good faith” participation does not require capitulation, but it does demand preparation, intellectual honesty, and engagement grounded in evidence rather than strategy alone.
For taxpayers and their counsel, the lesson is straightforward: approach the settlement conference as a substantive opportunity, not a formality. Doing so not only advances the possibility of resolution but also safeguards the statutory protections the legislature has expressly conditioned on meaningful participation.
Ryan Law