No. 32044 (Amendment):R884-24P-53. 2008 Valuation Guides for Valuation of Land Subject to the Farmland Assessment Act Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-515  

  • DAR File No.: 32044
    Filed: 10/14/2008, 01:31
    Received by: NL

    RULE ANALYSIS

    Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

    This amendment annually updates the agricultural productive values to be applied by county assessors to land qualifying for valuation and assessment under the Farmland Assessment Act (FAA). The values are recommended to the Commission by the State Farmland Evaluation Advisory Committee, which meets under the authority of Section 59-2-514.

    Summary of the rule or change:

    Section 59-2-515 authorizes the commission to promulgate rules regarding the Property Tax Act, Part 5, "Farmland Assessment Act". Section 59-2-514 authorizes the commission to receive valuation recommendations from the State Farmland Advisory Committee for implementation as outlined in Section R884-24P-53.

    State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

    Section 59-2-515

    Anticipated cost or savings to:

    the state budget:

    The amount of savings or cost to state government is undetermined. The state receives tax revenue for assessing and collecting and for the Uniform School Fund based on increased or decreased real and personal property valuation, including property assessed under the FAA (greenbelt). Property valuation (taxable value) changes have been recommended by class and by county. This year, 126 class/county valuations will increase, 78 will decrease and 133 will remain unchanged. No total cost or savings could be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class, a listing of property newly-qualified for FAA assessment during 2009, and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from greenbelt during 2008. However, it is estimated that the overall change is minimal due to this amendment.

    local governments:

    The amount of saving or cost to local government is undetermined. Local governmental entities receive tax revenue based on increased or decreased property valuation, including property on greenbelt. Property valuation changes have been recommended by class and by county. This year, 126 class/county valuations will increase, 78 will decrease and 133 will remain unchanged. No total cost or savings could be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class, a listing of property newly-qualified for greenbelt during 2009, and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from greenbelt during 2008. However, it is estimated that the overall change is minimal due to this amendment. County assessor offices statewide will be required to input the new value indicators into their computer systems to be applied against the acreage for individual properties. This input process is easily accomplished on an annual basis and represents no significant cost in time or money to the assessors' offices.

    small businesses and persons other than businesses:

    Each property owner with property eligible for assessment under the FAA may see a change in value, depending on property class and situs county as 126 such value indicators will increase, 78 will decrease and 133 will not change. The effect on the property owner will be valuation increase, decrease or no change depending on the mix of property types and situs. No aggregate compliance cost can be determined without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class, a listing of property newly-qualified for greenbelt during 2009, and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from greenbelt during 2008. In addition, the compliance cost will further be altered by changes to local property tax rates. However, it is estimated that the overall change due to this amendment is minimal.

    Compliance costs for affected persons:

    Each property owner with property eligible for assessment under the FAA may see a change in value, depending on property class and situs county as 126 such value indicators will increase, 78 will decrease and 133 will not change. The effect on the property owner will be valuation increase, decrease or no change depending on the mix of property types and situs. No compliance cost can be determined without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class, a listing of property newly-qualified for greenbelt during 2009, and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from greenbelt during 2008. In addition, the compliance cost will further be altered by changes to local property tax rates. However, it is estimated that the overall change due to this amendment is minimal.

    Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

    It is estimated the overall change due to this amendment is minimal. D'Arcy Dixon, Commissioner

    The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

    Tax Commission
    Property Tax
    210 N 1950 W
    SALT LAKE CITY UT 84134

    Direct questions regarding this rule to:

    Cheryl Lee at the above address, by phone at 801-297-3900, by FAX at 801-297-3919, or by Internet E-mail at clee@utah.gov

    Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

    12/01/2008

    This rule may become effective on:

    01/01/2009

    Authorized by:

    D'Arcy Dixon, Commissioner

    RULE TEXT

    R884. Tax Commission, Property Tax.

    R884-24P. Property Tax.

    R884-24P-53. [2008]2009 Valuation Guides for Valuation of Land Subject to the Farmland Assessment Act Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-515.

    (1) Each year the Property Tax Division shall update and publish schedules to determine the taxable value for land subject to the Farmland Assessment Act on a per acre basis.

    (a) The schedules shall be based on the productivity of the various types of agricultural land as determined through crop budgets and net rents.

    (b) Proposed schedules shall be transmitted by the Property Tax Division to county assessors for comment before adoption.

    (c) County assessors may not deviate from the schedules.

    (d) Not all types of agricultural land exist in every county. If no taxable value is shown for a particular county in one of the tables, that classification of agricultural land does not exist in that county.

    (2) All property defined as farmland pursuant to Section 59-2-501 shall be assessed on a per acre basis as follows:

    (a) Irrigated farmland shall be assessed under the following classifications.

    (i) Irrigated I. The following counties shall assess Irrigated I property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 1
    Irrigated I


    1) Box Elder 820
    2) Cache [690]710
    3) Carbon [540]530
    4) Davis [840]860
    5) Emery [525]510
    6) Iron [815]820
    7) Kane [450]430
    8) Millard [800]810
    9) Salt Lake [705]715
    10) Utah [735]750
    11) Washington [655]670
    12) Weber [800]815

     

    (ii) Irrigated II. The following counties shall assess Irrigated II property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 2
    Irrigated II


    1) Box Elder 720
    2) Cache [590]610
    3) Carbon [440]430
    4) Davis [740]760
    5) Duchesne 495
    6) Emery [425]410
    7) Grand [410]400
    8) Iron [715]720
    9) Juab [460]450
    10) Kane [350]330
    11) Millard [700]710
    12) Salt Lake [605]615
    13) Sanpete 550
    14) Sevier [570]575
    15) Summit 475
    16) Tooele 460
    17) Utah [635]650
    18) Wasatch 500
    19) Washington [555]570
    20) Weber [700]715

     

    (iii) Irrigated III. The following counties shall assess Irrigated III property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 3
    Irrigated III


    1) Beaver [565]580
    2) Box Elder 570
    3) Cache [440]460
    4) Carbon [290]280
    5) Davis [590]610
    6) Duchesne 345
    7) Emery [275]260
    8) Garfield [220]215
    9) Grand [260]250
    10) Iron [565]570
    11) Juab [310]300
    12) Kane [200]180
    13) Millard [550]560
    14) Morgan 395
    15) Piute [355]340
    16) Rich [190]180
    17) Salt Lake [455]465
    18) San Juan [180]175
    19) Sanpete 400
    20) Sevier [420]425
    21) Summit 325
    22) Tooele 310
    23) Uintah [385]375
    24) Utah [485]500
    25) Wasatch 350
    26) Washington [405]420
    27) Wayne [335]340
    28) Weber [550]565

     

    (iv) Irrigated IV. The following counties shall assess Irrigated IV property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 4
    Irrigated IV


    1) Beaver [465]480
    2) Box Elder 470
    3) Cache [340]360
    4) Carbon [190]180
    5) Daggett [220]200
    6) Davis [490]510
    7) Duchesne 245
    8) Emery [175]160
    9) Garfield [120]115
    10) Grand [160]150
    11) Iron [465]470
    12) Juab [210]200
    13) Kane [100]80
    14) Millard [450]460
    15) Morgan 295
    16) Piute [255]240
    17) Rich [90]80
    18) Salt Lake [355]365
    19) San Juan [80]75
    20) Sanpete 300
    21) Sevier [320]325
    22) Summit 225
    23) Tooele 210
    24) Uintah [285]275
    25) Utah [385]400
    26) Wasatch 250
    27) Washington [305]320
    28) Wayne [235]240
    29) Weber [450]465

     

    (b) Fruit orchards shall be assessed per acre based upon the following schedule:

     

    TABLE 5
    Fruit Orchards


    1) Beaver [640]620
    2) Box Elder [695]675
    3) Cache [640]620
    4) Carbon [640]620
    5) Davis [695]675
    6) Duchesne [640]620
    7) Emery [640]620
    8) Garfield [640]620
    9) Grand [640]620
    10) Iron [640]620
    11) Juab [640]620
    12) Kane [640]620
    13) Millard [640]620
    14) Morgan [640]620
    15) Piute [640]620
    16) Salt Lake [640]620
    17) San Juan [640]620
    18) Sanpete [640]620
    19) Sevier [640]620
    20) Summit [640]620
    21) Tooele [640]620
    22) Uintah [640]620
    23) Utah [710]690
    24) Wasatch [640]620
    25) Washington [760]740
    26) Wayne [640]620
    27) Weber [695]675

     

    (c) Meadow IV property shall be assessed per acre based upon the following schedule:

     

    TABLE 6
    Meadow IV


    1) Beaver [255]245
    2) Box Elder [250]260
    3) Cache [265]270
    4) Carbon 130
    5) Daggett 160
    6) Davis 270
    7) Duchesne 165
    8) Emery [130]140
    9) Garfield [100]105
    10) Grand [125]135
    11) Iron [250]260
    12) Juab 150
    13) Kane 110
    14) Millard 195
    15) Morgan [185]195
    16) Piute [175]190
    17) Rich 105
    18) Salt Lake 225
    19) Sanpete 195
    20) Sevier 200
    21) Summit 205
    22) Tooele 185
    23) Uintah [195]205
    24) Utah [240]250
    25) Wasatch 210
    26) Washington [220]230
    27) Wayne [170]175
    28) Weber 305

     

    (d) Dry land shall be classified as one of the following two categories and shall be assessed on a per acre basis as follows:

    (i) Dry III. The following counties shall assess Dry III property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 7
    Dry III


    1) Beaver 50
    2) Box Elder [85]95
    3) Cache [100]120
    4) Carbon 50
    5) Davis 50
    6) Duchesne [65]55
    7) Garfield 50
    8) Grand 50
    9) Iron [55]50
    10) Juab 50
    11) Kane 50
    12) Millard 50
    13) Morgan 65
    14) Rich 50
    15) Salt Lake [55]50
    16) San Juan 50
    17) Sanpete [60]55
    18) Summit 50
    19) Tooele 50
    20) Uintah [60]55
    21) Utah 50
    22) Wasatch 50
    23) Washington 50
    24) Weber 80

     

    (ii) Dry IV. The following counties shall assess Dry IV property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 8
    Dry IV


    1) Beaver [10]15
    2) Box Elder [50]60
    3) Cache [65]85
    4) Carbon 15
    5) Davis 15
    6) Duchesne [30]20
    7) Garfield 15
    8) Grand 15
    9) Iron [20]15
    10) Juab 15
    11) Kane 15
    12) Millard 15
    13) Morgan 30
    14) Rich 15
    15) Salt Lake [20]15
    16) San Juan 15
    17) Sanpete [25]20
    18) Summit 15
    19) Tooele 15
    20) Uintah [25]20
    21) Utah 15
    22) Wasatch 15
    23) Washington 15
    24) Weber 45

     

    (e) Grazing land shall be classified as one of the following four categories and shall be assessed on a per acre basis as follows:

    (i) Graze 1. The following counties shall assess Graze I property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 9
    GR I


    1) Beaver [88]75
    2) Box Elder [72]80
    3) Cache [75]76
    4) Carbon 56
    5) Daggett 60
    6) Davis 66
    7) Duchesne [70]71
    8) Emery [70]78
    9) Garfield [80]83
    10) Grand [76]84
    11) Iron [68]75
    12) Juab 70
    13) Kane [85]81
    14) Millard [84]83
    15) Morgan [60]68
    16) Piute [87]97
    17) Rich [70]71
    18) Salt Lake 72
    19) San Juan [72]73
    20) Sanpete 69
    21) Sevier 70
    22) Summit 78
    23) Tooele 77
    24) Uintah [74]84
    25) Utah [60]65
    26) Wasatch [57]58
    27) Washington [65]72
    28) Wayne [92]95
    29) Weber 74

     

    (ii) Graze II. The following counties shall assess Graze II property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 10
    GR II


    1) Beaver [28]25
    2) Box Elder [23]27
    3) Cache [24]25
    4) Carbon [16]18
    5) Daggett [17]18
    6) Davis [21]22
    7) Duchesne [22]24
    8) Emery [21]25
    9) Garfield [25]27
    10) Grand [22]26
    11) Iron [20]24
    12) Juab [21]22
    13) Kane [26]28
    14) Millard [26]28
    15) Morgan [19]22
    16) Piute [27]31
    17) Rich [23]24
    18) Salt Lake [22]24
    19) San Juan [22]24
    20) Sanpete [21]23
    21) Sevier [21]23
    22) Summit [23]25
    23) Tooele [24]25
    24) Uintah [23]28
    25) Utah [20]23
    26) Wasatch [18]20
    27) Washington [21]25
    28) Wayne [28]32
    29) Weber 23

     

    (iii) Graze III. The following counties shall assess Graze III property based upon the per acre values below:

     

    TABLE 11
    GR III


    1) Beaver [18]17
    2) Box Elder [15]18
    3) Cache [15]16
    4) Carbon [12]13
    5) Daggett [12]13
    6) Davis [13]14
    7) Duchesne [14]15
    8) Emery [14]16
    9) Garfield [16]18
    10) Grand [15]17
    11) Iron [14]17
    12) Juab [14]15
    13) Kane 17
    14) Millard [17]18
    15) Morgan [12]14
    16) Piute [17]20
    17) Rich [14]15
    18) Salt Lake [14]15
    19) San Juan [15]16
    20) Sanpete [14]15
    21) Sevier [14]15
    22) Summit [15]16
    23) Tooele 15
    24) Uintah [14]18
    25) Utah [12]14
    26) Wasatch [12]13
    27) Washington [13]15
    28) Wayne [18]20
    29) Weber 15

     

    (iv) Graze IV. The following counties shall assess Graze IV property based upon the per acre values listed below:

     

    TABLE 12
    GR IV


    1) Beaver [7]6
    2) Box Elder [6]5
    3) Cache 5
    4) Carbon 5
    5) Daggett 5
    6) Davis 5
    7) Duchesne 5
    8) Emery [5]6
    9) Garfield [6]5
    10) Grand [5]6
    11) Iron 6
    12) Juab 5
    13) Kane 5
    14) Millard [6]5
    15) Morgan 6
    16) Piute 6
    17) Rich 5
    18) Salt Lake 5
    19) San Juan 5
    20) Sanpete 5
    21) Sevier 5
    22) Summit 5
    23) Tooele [6]5
    24) Uintah 6
    25) Utah 5
    26) Wasatch 5
    27) Washington 5
    28) Wayne [6]5
    29) Weber 6

     

    (f) Land classified as nonproductive shall be assessed as follows on a per acre basis:

     

    TABLE 13
    Nonproductive Land


    Nonproductive Land
    1) All Counties 5

     

    KEY: taxation, personal property, property tax, appraisals

    Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [March 28, 2008]2009

    Notice of Continuation: March 12, 2007

    Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 59-2-515

     

     

Document Information

Effective Date:
1/1/2009
Publication Date:
11/01/2008
Filed Date:
10/14/2008
Agencies:
Tax Commission,Property Tax
Rulemaking Authority:

Section 59-2-515

Authorized By:
D'Arcy Dixon, Commissioner
DAR File No.:
32044
Related Chapter/Rule NO.: (1)
R884-24P-53. 2004 Valuation Guides for Valuation of Land Subject to the Farmland Assessment Act Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-515.