Michael Pung, Personal Representative of the Estate of Timothy Scott Pung, Petitioner v. Isabella County, Michigan

The justices heard a case about what happens when a county takes a home over unpaid property taxes, sells it, and keeps value above the tax debt. The dispute is whether the Constitution requires compensation based on the home's fair market value or only the lower auction price, and whether keeping the surplus can be an excessive fine.

The case was argued on Feb. 25, 2026, and no decision is available yet. The dispute centers on whether the Fifth Amendment requires compensation for the property's true fair market value and whether the Eighth Amendment bars the government from keeping value far above a small tax debt.

The answer could affect homeowners who lose property over relatively small tax debts. For example, if a home is worth much more than the taxes owed, the case asks whether the owner must be paid for that extra value.

The case asks whether the county had to pay for the home's full value after taking it for tax debt. It also asks whether keeping value far above the debt is an excessive fine.

Homeowners facing tax foreclosure could be directly affected, especially when a property is worth much more than the unpaid taxes. Counties and other local governments could also have to change how they handle surplus value.

The justices have already heard argument. The main thing to watch is the written opinion, which is generally expected by late June or early July unless the Court says otherwise.