Challenges in Property Tax Assessment and Rating Practices: Evidence from Valuation Firms in Johor, Malaysia

Property tax assessment and rating constitute the financial backbone of local authorities, yet valuation firms face persistent operational challenges that undermine the effectiveness of the system. This study investigates the specific challenges encountered by valuation firms in conducting property tax assessments for rating purposes in Johor, Malaysia, a rapidly developing region characterized by dynamic property markets and significant cross-border investment within the Iskandar Malaysia corridor. The research was guided by a clear objective: to systematically identify and understand the operational, technical, and procedural hurdles that hinder accurate and equitable property tax valuations at the municipal level. Employing a qualitative research design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven valuation practitioners involved in recent rating exercises for the local authorities of Kluang, Segamat, and Kulai. These three districts were purposefully selected to represent a cross-section of Johor's diverse urban and semi-urban property landscapes. A manual, color-coded content analysis was applied to identify recurring themes systematically. The findings reveal eight major challenges ranked by frequency: inadequate property data (7/7), limited market information (6/7), shortage of skilled valuers (6/7), technological limitations (6/7), mixed-use property complexities (6/7), low public awareness (5/7), inconsistent guidelines across municipalities (4/7), and limited budget for assessment activities (3/7). Three emergent findings, namely limited market information, inconsistent guidelines, and limited budget, were not prominently discussed in prior literature and thus represent novel contributions to the body of knowledge on property tax administration in emerging economies. This study introduces the concept of Operational Valuation Dynamics, which posits that assessment accuracy depends not merely on calculation methods but also on the dynamic interaction among data accessibility, human resource capacity, technological integration, and procedural standardization. The findings provide a practical roadmap for modernizing data management and standardizing valuation procedures across Malaysian local authorities.

Property tax assessment, valuation challenges, rating system, valuer perspective, Malaysia

1. Abd Rahman, N. A. Y., Senawi, A., Mohamed Saraf, M. H., & Che Pin, S. F. (2021). Investigation of impediment factors in property tax revaluation practices. Planning Malaysia, 19(16). https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v19i16.960 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Abdullah, S., Abdul Wahab, M. R., Abdul Razak, A., & Hanafi, M. H. (2022). Property taxation: The encouraging factors for payment among the taxpayers. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-07-2021-0042 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Almy, R. (2014). Mass appraisal valuation systems: International practice. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Almy, R., & McPherson, M. (2019). Principles of property taxation. Urban Public Finance Series. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bahl, R., & Martinez-Vazquez, J. (2018). The impact of property taxes in developing countries. Public Finance and Development Studies, 9(2), 50-66. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Basit, T. N. (2003). Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis. Educational Research, 45(2), 143-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188032000133548 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using content analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Daud, M., Pawi, S., & Ismail, M. (2013). Revenue management in local governments. Journal of Public Finance, 12(1), 28-39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ismail, M., & Ahmad, R. (2020). Digitalisation in valuation and property tax. Malaysian Property Journal, 22(2), 47-61. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Ismail, M., & Ahmad, R. (2021). Valuation roles and legislative frameworks in Malaysia. Journal of Malaysian Town Planning, 30(1), 78-95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Jashari, S. (2020). Theoretical foundations of municipal tax systems. Public Administration Review, 82(3), 389-407. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kaganova, O. (2019). Professional development in valuation: A global review. Journal of Urban Economics, 67(3), 140-155. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lohri, C. R., Camenzind, E. J., & Zurbrugg, C. (2014). Financial sustainability in municipal solid waste management. Waste Management, 34(2), 542-552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.014 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. McCluskey, W., et al. (2013). Valuation for rating purposes: A global review. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Mohammad, R., Sahari, S., & Abdullah, A. (2018). Valuation practice and challenges. Real Estate Malaysian Review, 19(1), 112-126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mohd Noor, N., Zulkifli, N., & Ismail, N. (2020). Revenue enhancement strategies for local councils. Journal of Local Finance, 28(1), 15-29. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Mohd Razali, M., Noraniza, R., & Ismail, H. (2021). CPD and professional gaps in valuation. Malaysian Valuers Digest, 6(2), 43-57. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Mukhriz, M. N., Aziz, R. A., & Jamaluddin, H. (2024). Urbanisation and property development in Johor. Johor Development Review, 18(1), 14-33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Noraniza, R., & Ismail, M. (2016). Public perception and tax compliance. Property and Society, 14(3), 177-191. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. O'Leary, S. (2016). Graduates’ experiences of employability-related support. Journal of Education and Work, 30(1), 84-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2015.1122181 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Othman, S., Nawawi, A., & Yusof, M. (2023). Improved valuation methods in local councils. Malaysia Tax Review, 11(3), 134-149. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sahari, S. N., Samsudin, S., & Suratman, R. (2021). The conceptual framework for analyze efficiency in land tax administration system. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v11-i/19016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Senawi, A., & Osmadi, A. (2022). Intellectual capital and property tax reassessment performance of local authorities. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1060219 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Smith, R., & Johnson, T. (2019). Valuation services for local authorities. Property Assessment and Management Journal, 10(2), 33-47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.7275/z6fm-2e34 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Tan, C. K., & Lim, R. (2022). Governance variations in state-level tax systems. Governance Studies Review, 17(1), 88-103. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Valuation and Property Services Department (VPSD). (2022). Annual report. Ministry of Finance Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Williamson, I., Enemark, S., Wallace, J., & Rajabifard, A. (2010). Land administration for sustainable development. ESRI Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Yazrin Yasin, M., Abdullah, J., Yusoff, M. M., & Mohd Noor, N. (2021). The urbanization and growth of Malaysia: Case study of Iskandar Region. International Journal of Social Science and Economics Invention, 7(03), 53-66. https://doi.org/10.23958/ijssei/vol07-i03/278 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Young, D. S., & Casey, E. A. (2018). An examination of the sufficiency of small qualitative samples. Social Work Research, 43(1), 53-58. https://doi.org/10.1093/SWR/SVY026 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Analysis of Housing Deficit in Urban Cities: A Case Study of Port Harcourt
• Selection Factors for Security Service Companies in Strata Schemes in Malaysia
• Greed, Grievance, and Guns: A Resource-Driven Conflict in Zimbabwe's Mining Communities - A Case Study of Marange Diamond Mines
• Public Acceptance of Durian Farmland Real Estate Investment Via Crowdfunding in Malaysia
• Students’ Perceptions on Value-Added the Islamic Estate Planning Course in Real Estate Education