# Incorrect Mineral Tax statements
**URL:** https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422
**Category:** General Mineral Rights Discussion
**Created:** [October 28, 2025, 1:13am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422 "2025-10-28T01:13:24Z")
**Posts on this page:** 6
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Jhab](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Jhab)
#### Post date: [October 28, 2025, 1:13am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422/1 "2025-10-28T01:13:25Z")
I have wells that run from Midland (80%) into Upton (20%) County (Section 43-06). They contract with Prichard and Abbot for their valuations.
I just received my tax statements from Midland and had 2 extra wells listed. The same for Upton. They look like duplicates to me. When I called P&A they said it was probably new wells. I disagreed. I have had no communication from XTO/Exxon. No new division orders. No new revenue on the monthly statements. They are looking into it.
I highly suggest everyone closely review their tax statements, especially if their county uses P&A for their valuations.
---
### Author:  [@TennisDaze](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/TennisDaze)
#### Post date: [October 28, 2025, 2:39am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422/2 "2025-10-28T02:39:26Z")
Have you compared the earlier appraisal detail from P&A website to the tax statements? The tax statements should identify the wells by name and RRC lease number. Oil lease numbers may include multiple wells which are sometimes taxed together and sometimes taxed separately. Then the RRC# and well name will be same, except for being #1 and #2 or 1H and 2H. In one odd circumstance, the oil valuation and the gas valuation for the same well were taxed separately. This was because in one tract the gas minerals and the oil minerals were owned by different people and that created 2 different decks at operator level. Most owners got two tax statements with same DOI. Also look at RRC wells to make sure you are in pay on all the producing wells. Sometimes wells start producing and end up on the tax roll, but the operator has not sent out the DO or the DO were not delivered to you by USPS. But operator may have sent royalty deck to tax authority. I have had positive experiences with P&A over many years in reviewing the appraisal details and getting questions answered and any corrections during the open notice period. I think the P&A appraisers are quite experienced.
---
### Author:  [@Jhab](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Jhab)
#### Post date: [October 28, 2025, 9:57pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422/3 "2025-10-28T21:57:45Z")
These are the wells in question. It looks like line 2 and line 4 are duplicates of 1 and 3. Nothing has changed in the past 5 years until this year.
Midland
| 11985 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 # 0657CH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43 A- | XTO ENERGY INC. | RI | 6,820 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 13871 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 0 657CH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43 A- | XTO ENERGY INC | RI | 6,820 |
| 11984 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 # 0697BH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43 A- | XTO ENERGY INC. | RI | 6,740 |
| 13872 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 0 697BH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43 A- | XTO ENERGY INC | RI | 6,820 |
Upton - Lines 2 and 3 are in error.
| 401837 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 # 0657CH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43/6 | XTO ENERGY INC | RI | 1,300 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 402920 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 0 657CH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43 A- | MIDLAND ISD | RI | 1,300 |
| 402921 | MIDKIFF 43-06 0667 0 657BH | Township 4 South Block 38 Section 43 A- | XTO ENERGY INC | RI | 1,300 |
---
### Author:  [@TennisDaze](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/TennisDaze)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2025, 12:45am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422/4 "2025-10-29T00:45:52Z")
It looks like the double well interests have different DOI. Perhaps the operator revised and resubmitted the deck decimals and as a result, your interest is now listed twice. Look at your check and DOI to see which DOI is correct (and if it has changed). Then ask about submitting a copy of the recent check with correct DOI to have one or the other double listing deleted. Also, look carefully at the XTO check because it likely has the two columns, one for royalty decimal and a second for distribution decimal. So that may be the root of the problem.
---
### Author:  [@Jhab](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Jhab)
#### Post date: [January 9, 2026, 8:34pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422/5 "2026-01-09T20:34:17Z")
I received the following from Midland. I’m still waiting on Upton.
Good Morning,
I just received word that our software company has gotten back to us about these changes. The data that was dumped into our system was for corrected statements and not for supplemental. Due to this difference, there is automatic penalty and interest applied. However, since you are the last person who paid on the accounts, we can move the credits to pay off the balance on the other accounts. Therefore, you do not have any further taxes due currently. Just so you are aware it will take some time to get these moved around so it will not be reflected in your account immediately.
---
### Author:  [@system](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2026, 1:13am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/incorrect-mineral-tax-statements/84422/7 "2026-01-26T01:13:31Z")
This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.