Signature and declaration of persons making returns of taxable property.

(b) The fact that a person appears to have signed a return of taxable property on behalf of a person required to file a return shall be prima-facie evidence that the person was authorized to sign on behalf of such person.

(d) (1) As used in this subsection, the term “digital signature” means a digital or electronic method executed or adopted by a party with the intent to be bound by or to authenticate a record, which is unique to the person using it, is capable of verification, is under the sole control of the person using it, and is linked to data in such a manner that if the data are changed the digital or electronic signature is invalidated.

(2) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the commissioner is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations setting forth the procedure for satisfying the signature requirement for returns whether by electronic digital signature, voice signature, or other means, so long as appropriate security measures are implemented which assure security and verification of the signature procedure. History. Ga. L. 1884-85, p. 28, § 3; Ga. L. 1886, p. 24, § 2; Civil Code 1895, § 834; Ga. L. 1909, p. 36, § 16; Civil Code 1910, § 1091; Code 1933, § 92-6216; Ga. L. 1964, p. 333, § 2; Code 1933, § 91A-1014, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 309, § 2; Ga. L. 2000, p. 1360, § 1. JUDICIAL DECISIONS Section contemplates that the taxpayer must return every species of property which the taxpayer controls as agent or trustee. Douglas v. McCurdy, 154 Ga. 814, 115 S.E. 658, 1923 Ga. LEXIS 403 (1923). Oath is necessary part of return. — Oath prescribed by this statute is a part of the return of the taxpayer, and is necessary to make the return complete or of any probative value. McLendon v. Dunlap Hdwe. Co., 3 Ga. App. 206, 59 S.E. 718, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 597 (1907). Filing by the seller of property of a real estate tax transfer form that was not signed by the buyer, did not contain an oath as required by O.C.G.A. § 48-5-19, and did not contain section numbers of the parcels of property was not sufficient to serve as a return of real property. CC Office Assocs. v. DeKalb County, 219 Ga. App. 101, 464 S.E.2d 243, 1995 Ga. App. LEXIS 955 (1995). Manner in which oath to be made. — Acts of the administering officer and of the affiant must be concurrent, and must conclusively indicate that it was the purpose of the one to administer and the other to take the oath in order to make a valid affidavit. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). In order to make an affidavit, there must be present the officer and affiant and the paper, and there must be something done which amounts to the administration of an oath. The affiant must swear to the affidavit, and the fact of the affiant’s swearing must be certified by a proper officer. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). Presumption that taxpayer made oath as to return. — When the taxpayer was required to make an oath to the return, in the absence of any showing to the contrary, it must be presumed that the taxpayer did so. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). Effect of oath administered by or affidavit subscribed before unqualified person. — Since it is required by this statute that the oath be administered by and the affidavit subscribed before the tax commissioner, the attempted performance by anyone else will be without force or validity unless such person were authorized by law to do it. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). An attempted oath administered by one who is personally not qualified to administer the oath is abortive and in effect no oath. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). Requirement that oath be statement by taxpayer rather than tax official. — Form of the oath prescribed by this statute and used in the printed form on the returns requires that the person making the return swear that “the value placed by me” — not that placed by the tax officials — “is the true market value thereof.” Otherwise the returns are hearsay, without probative value, and should be excluded. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). Proof of agency required. — In performance of the commissioner’s duty to examine tax returns before receiving the returns, a commissioner has discretion to reject returns signed by a person other than the owner, absent proof of authorization. Southern Tax Consultants, Inc. v. Scott, 267 Ga. 347, 478 S.E.2d 126, 1996 Ga. LEXIS 936 (1996). Effect of writing without valid jurat. — In the absence of a valid jurat, a writing in the form of an affidavit has no force or validity, and amounts to nothing, whether standing alone or when construed in connection with other evidence. Gruber v. Fulton County, 111 Ga. App. 71, 140 S.E.2d 552, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 882 (1965). Underpayment of taxes based on automatic tax return. — Following a bench trial, an order was issued establishing the 1997 fair market value of the taxpayer’s property at a value of $4,709,000.00, which was an amount greater than the value set by the board of equalization; however, when the taxpayer paid taxes in 1997, 1998, and 1999, the taxpayer did so based on the board of equalization’s 1997 valuation and because the 1997 value of the taxpayer’s property was finally determined to be $4,709,000.00, the taxpayer automatically returned the property in 1998 and 1999 at that value and, thus, the taxpayer underpaid the taxpayer’s taxes for the 1997, 1998, and 1999 tax years and the tax assessors were entitled to a summary judgment finding that the taxpayer had underpaid the taxpayer’s taxes and owed additional sums. Pine Pointe Hous., L. P. v. Bd. of Tax Assessors, 269 Ga. App. 855, 605 S.E.2d 443, 2004 Ga. App. LEXIS 1318 (2004), cert. denied, No. S05C0346, 2005 Ga. LEXIS 92 (Ga. Jan. 24, 2005). OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Requirement that oath state “fair market value” rather than “market value” or “book value.” — Since the form of the oath requires that the taxpayer swear to the fair market value of the property returned, an oath which departs from this statutory form by allowing the taxpayer to swear to the book value of the taxpayer’s property is not authorized by law; “market value” and “book value” are not synonymous. 1970 Op. Atty Gen. No. U70-115.