One lawsuit, which will be heard by the state Supreme Court, claims the state law allowing counties to offer the tax break is unconstitutional. A Circuit Court judge already has said the law is unconstitutional in a ruling on another lawsuit. But he did not strike down the cap because that issue was not specifically questioned in the case.

Another lawsuit headed to the Supreme Court could force Charleston County to refund millions of dollars to taxpayers because its first version of the 15 percent tax cap applied only to owner-occupied homes and was declared illegal in an earlier Supreme Court ruling.

The tax cap limits increases in property value to 15 percent when homes and businesses are reassessed every five years for tax purposes, a process required by state law. The state legislature passed a law in 2000 allowing counties to adopt the cap, but Charleston County is the only county in the state to do so.

After delaying the scheduled reassessment of property values for a year in 2003, Beaufort County Council has been waiting for the outcome of Charleston County's legal battles before deciding whether to adopt the cap. In particular, the council is waiting to see whether the cap is declared unconstitutional.

But the council's Finance Committee plans to take up the cap discussion again Monday to make a decision so it is ready to act when the court rules.

Supporters of the cap say it would bring savings both to wealthy oceanfront homeowners and longtime residents with lower incomes whose land is rising in value.

Opponents say it will bring higher taxes for homeowners who don't fall into either category and whose tax bills do not increase 15 percent because local governments are likely to raise tax rates across the board to make up for revenue lost under the cap.

CHARLESTON'S FIRST CAP

The first lawsuit Charleston County faced -- and lost -- came because its first version of the 15 percent cap ordinance did not follow the provisions outlined in state law. The law states that counties can limit tax increases to 15 percent for all property types, but the ordinance Charleston County implemented in 2001 only capped values for owner-occupied homes.

Four owners of rental property sued the county in a case called Riverwoods vs. Charleston County. Circuit Court Judge Victor Rawl sided with the property owners, saying the cap was illegal if applied only to one property type.

The county appealed, but the Supreme Court agreed with Rawl and struck down the ordinance in May 2002.

In his ruling, Rawl noted that while the county's ordinance did not comply with the state law, the law itself appeared to violate two articles of the South Carolina constitution. The constitution states that counties should assess properties at "actual value" and "fair market value," but the cap law allows the taxed value to be limited.

"The court is mindful that (this) fatal deficiency besets the enabling act and that it is similarly unconstitutional," Rawl wrote. "... However, the court refrains from extending its declaration of unconstitutionality to the enabling act and limits it to the ordinance in question."

The Supreme Court in its May 2002 ruling refused to determine whether the state law is constitutional, citing the same reason: It was not the question asked in the lawsuit.

TAX REFUNDS

Shortly after the high court's 2002 ruling, the plaintiffs sued again, this time for a refund, said Trenholm Walker, a Charleston lawyer representing the property owners.

"The ultimate effect of the cap was that it shifted taxes to those who did not benefit," Walker said.

His clients are seeking the difference in the taxes they paid in 2001 and the taxes they would have paid if the 15 percent cap had not been applied to some properties.

Walker said the tax cap reduced Charleston County's property tax base by $2.5 million, and the council raised the tax rate to generate more money. He said taxpayers should be refunded about 4 percent to 6 percent of the taxes they paid. The lawsuit also is seeking interest on those tax payments.

Since it was filed, the refund lawsuit, called Brackenbrook North Charleston vs. Charleston County, has become a class action lawsuit, meaning every property owner in the county who did not benefit from the cap is represented. Walker said about 90,000 taxpayers' refunds are at stake.

Charleston County Assessor Mike Huggins said the county could be forced to pay between $10 million and $14 million in refunds, depending on how interest is calculated.

Rawl, the Circuit Court judge, already has heard the case and a similar one in which a family sued separately, a case called Hoefer Family vs. Charleston County. Rawl ruled against the county in both cases, ordering officials to refund the tax money.

Charleston County has appealed those decisions to the Supreme Court, Walker said, and the high court probably will hear them both in April.

Walker said the Hoefer family filed its refund lawsuit before his clients. The family chose not to be part of the class action suit and is seeking refunds calculated differently. John Hoefer, a lawyer and party in the lawsuit, could not be reached for comment.

ANOTHER CAP, ANOTHER LAWSUIT

Charleston County Council in 2002 adopted another version of the cap ordinance, this time in compliance with state law, Huggins said. It applies to all property types. But the council has not yet implemented the ordinance.

Huggins said the county is waiting on the outcome of a fourth lawsuit, in which the city of North Charleston is challenging the constitutionality of the state law -- the issue Rawl commented on in 2002 but did not rule on.

Attorneys for Charleston County and North Charleston could not be reached for comment. Officials in the S.C. Supreme Court's office could not confirm when that case would be heard.

Beaufort County staff attorney Kelly Golden said the case would be heard first by the state Supreme Court, without an initial decision from a lower court. When a date is set, she said, Beaufort County plans to file either as a friend of the court or as a third party in the lawsuit.

If the tax cap law is declared constitutional, Golden said she would like the court to clarify how a county should implement it.

While the court still has not decided whether the state law giving counties the option of implementing a 15 percent tax cap is constitutional, a bill moving through the South Carolina legislature would force all 46 counties to adopt the cap.

Seventy-seven of 124 House of Representative members have signed on as co-sponsors of the bill.

The House Ways and Means Committee debated the bill this past week and gave it a favorable recommendation to the full House.