New Maryland Tax Sale Law Causes Confusion and Friction Between Municipalities and County

DISCLAIMER: Treasurer Matt Breeding is currently running for County Commissioner. The following article contains reflections of his statements regarding a current dispute with the County Commissioners and County Administrator. Radio Free Hub City strives to present all sides of this conflict, but has included an interview with Treasurer Breeding since he is considered a subject matter expert in County Tax Sale matters.

A recently enacted Maryland tax law is creating significant confusion and operational challenges for municipalities within Washington County, prompting concerns about financial stability and leading to disagreements over tax sale procedures. The new legislation, effective January 1, 2026, restricts tax sales for owner-occupied properties if the total delinquent taxes, penalties, and fees fall below $1,000. This change, which many municipalities were apparently not aware of, has led to a reduced number of properties eligible for tax sale, impacting municipal budgets that rely on these collections.

This article was update 6/8/2026 to include revised estimates from the treasurer for time to input municipal tax sales.

The core of the issue lies in Washington County’s unique system of tax collection. Unlike many other counties in Maryland, Washington County does not handle the billing and collection of real estate taxes on behalf of its municipalities. This leads to a cumbersome process where municipalities must submit their delinquent lists annually to the county treasurer’s office. This manual data entry is time-consuming, with the county treasurer estimating it requires approximately 20 man-hours to add all municipalities – four hours each for five staff members. Treasurer Matt Breeding has long advocated for the county to take over municipal billing, citing potential efficiencies and cost savings for both the county and the taxpayers, as detailed in the following interview.

The Washington County Board of County Commissioners has urged the Treasurer to hold a second tax sale by June 30, 2026, to include all delinquent county, state, and municipal taxes and liens. They expressed that municipalities budgeted for tax sale revenue collections to support critical operations and are concerned about potential financial hardship if a second tax sale is delayed. The Commissioners noted that municipalities were considering legal action against the county to compel a full tax sale, a move they believe would be detrimental to all parties involved. They are also requesting a second tax sale before the end of the fiscal year to mitigate potential financial strain on municipalities and improve intergovernmental relations.

However, Treasurer Breeding has raised concerns about the information provided to the Board of County Commissioners, stating that it was inaccurate. He highlighted that several municipalities, including Funkstown, Sharpsburg, and Keedysville, either submitted no properties for the tax sale or had properties ineligible due to the new $1,000 threshold for owner-occupied residences. According to Breeding the Treasurer’s office also reported significant success in collecting delinquent municipal accounts before they reached tax sale status, particularly for the City of Hagerstown, where over 100 accounts were collected in April 2026 alone.

A key point of contention is the interpretation of state law regarding the county’s obligation to conduct tax sales for municipalities. Treasurer Breeding’s office has found no statutory requirement mandating the county to perform this service, although the law permits municipal participation. He has requested a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to govern the county’s administration of municipal tax sales, noting that such agreements are generally required for county services provided to municipalities. The absence of an MOU, coupled with what he perceives as a lack of complete and accurate information presented to the Board of County Commissioners, leads him to believe that decisions are being made without a full understanding of the facts.

For reference, applicable Maryland law is under section 14-808 (a) (1) which states “Except for property that has been transferred by a municipality or county to a land bank authority established under § 1–1403 of the Local Government Article, and except as provided under § 14–811 of this subtitle, the collector shall proceed to sell and shall sell under this subtitle, at the time required by local law, all property in the county in which the collector is elected or appointed on which the tax is in arrears.”

Also applicable is section 14-809 (a), which states “When a property in a municipal corporation is delinquent in the payment of municipal corporation taxes or charges levied against the property, the appropriate municipal corporation official charged with the collection of taxes shall notify the collector of the county of the unpaid taxes or charges on the property” and “If the procedures of this subtitle are not instituted by the county collector on or before 30 days after receiving the notice from the municipal corporation collector, the municipal corporation collector at any time after the 30-day period expires may use the provisions and procedures of this subtitle to sell the property for unpaid municipal corporation taxes or charges to the same extent that these provisions and procedures are available to county collectors.” However, section 14-809 also contains a part (b) which states “The county collector shall use the provisions and procedures of this subtitle on notification by the municipal corporation collector of unpaid municipal corporation taxes and proceed to advertise and sell any real property located in any municipal corporation in the county on which municipal corporation taxes are delinquent,” but part (b) only applies to Calvert and Garrett counties, which may indicate that it is not required that the county collector for all other counties to advertise or sell for municipalities.

To address these challenges and ease the burden on property owners, Washington County plans to conduct a supplemental online tax sale in late July. Under this proposed model, municipalities would be responsible for newspaper advertisements, and the county is working with an online auction company to enable direct payment of tax sale proceeds to municipalities. This initiative aims to eliminate a $250 premium penalty previously charged by the county for conducting tax sales and a $150 newspaper penalty, potentially saving property owners around $400 upon redemption.

The underlying issue of municipalities managing their own tax billing and collection persists. Treasurer Breeding argues that the current system is outdated, inefficient, and unnecessarily costly for taxpayers. He points out that most other Maryland counties have centralized tax billing and collection systems, which simplifies the process for residents by consolidating bills and payments. This also reduces duplicated effort across multiple municipalities, ultimately leading to lower administrative overhead and taxpayer savings. The benefits for taxpayers would include a single bill, a single payment, online and EFT options, partial monthly payments, less confusion, and reduced administrative costs.

According to Treasurer Breeding, the County will hold a second tax sale online at the end of July for qualifying properties, including municipal properties.

Source documents used in this article are available in our public information archive.

Article by Ken Buckler, based upon information from Washington County Treasurer’s Office, Board of County Commissioners, and interview with Treasurer Matt Breeding

Video Spotlight