No. 34149 (Amendment): Section R884-24P-53. 2010 Valuation Guides for Valuation of Land Subject to the Farmland Assessment Act Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-515  

  • (Amendment)

    DAR File No.: 34149
    Filed: 10/13/2010 06:14:17 PM

    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. 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 State Tax Commission to promulgate rules regarding the Property Tax Act, Part 5, Farmland Assessment Act. Section 59-2-514 authorizes the State Tax 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:

    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 Education Fund based on increased or decreased real and personal property valuation, including property assessed under the Farmland Assessment Act (FAA). Property valuation (taxable value) changes have been recommended by class and by county. This year, 104 class/county valuations will increase, 62 will decrease and 298 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 2011 and a listing of property no longer qualifying that is removed from FAA during 2010. 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 assessed under FAA. Property valuation changes have been recommended by class and by county. This year, 104 class/county valuations will increase, 62 will decrease and 298 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 during 2011 and a listing of property no longer qualifying that is removed from FAA during 2010. 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:

    Each property owner with property eligible for assessment under FAA may see a change in value, depending on property class and situs county as 104 such value indicators will increase, 62 will decrease and 298 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 FAA during 2011 and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from FAA during 2010. 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.

    persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:

    Each property owner with property eligible for assessment under FAA may see a change in value, depending on property class and situs county as 104 such value indicators will increase, 62 will decrease and 298 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 FAA during 2011 and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from FAA during 2010. 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 FAA may see a change in value, depending on property class and situs county as 104 such value indicators will increase, 62 will decrease and 298 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 FAA during 2011 and a listing of property no longer qualifying that is removed from FAA during 2010. 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:

    No cost to businesses.

    Michael Cragun, 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:

    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:

    12/01/2010

    This rule may become effective on:

    12/08/2010

    Authorized by:

    R. Bruce Johnson, Tax Commission Chair

    RULE TEXT

    R884. Tax Commission, Property Tax.

    R884-24P. Property Tax.

    R884-24P-53. [2010]2011 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]qualifying for agricultural use assessment pursuant to Section 59-2-[501]503 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          [835]840
              2)   Cache              [725]730
              3)   Carbon             [540]545
              4)   Davis              [875]880
              5)   Emery              [520]525
              6)   Iron               [835]840
              7)   Kane               [435]440
              8)   Millard            [825]830
              9)   Salt Lake          [725]730
             10)   Utah               [765]770
             11)   Washington         [685]690
             12)   Weber              [830]835

     

    (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          [735]738
              2)   Cache              [620]623
              3)   Carbon             [430]433
              4)   Davis              [770]773
              5)   Duchesne           [505]508
              6)   Emery              [420]423
              7)   Grand              [405]407
              8)   Iron               [735]738
              9)   Juab               [455]458
             10)   Kane               [335]338
             11)   Millard            [725]728
             12)   Salt Lake          [625]628
             13)   Sanpete            [560]563
             14)   Sevier             [585]588
             15)   Summit             [485]488
             16)   Tooele             [470]472
             17)   Utah               [665]668
             18)   Wasatch            [510]513
             19)   Washington         [585]588
             20)   Weber              [730]733

     

    (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             [595]596
              2)   Box Elder          [580]581
              3)   Cache              [470]471
              4)   Carbon             [285]287
              5)   Davis              [620]622
              6)   Duchesne           [355]357
              7)   Emery              [265]267
              8)   Garfield           [220]222
              9)   Grand              [255]256
             10)   Iron               [585]587
             11)   Juab               [305]307
             12)   Kane               [185]187
             13)   Millard            [575]577
             14)   Morgan             [405]406
             15)   Piute              [350]351
             16)   Rich               [185]187
             17)   Salt Lake          [475]477
             18)   San Juan           [180]182
             19)   Sanpete            [410]412
             20)   Sevier             [435]437
             21)   Summit             [330]332
             22)   Tooele             [315]316
             23)   Uintah             [385]386
             24)   Utah               [510]511
             25)   Wasatch            [355]356
             26)   Washington         [430]432
             27)   Wayne              [345]347
             28)   Weber              [580]582

     

    (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              490
              2)   Box Elder           480
              3)   Cache               365
              4)   Carbon              185
              5)   Daggett             205
              6)   Davis               520
              7)   Duchesne            250
              8)   Emery               165
              9)   Garfield            120
             10)   Grand               155
             11)   Iron                480
             12)   Juab                205
             13)   Kane                 85
             14)   Millard             470
             15)   Morgan              300
             16)   Piute               245
             17)   Rich             [85]87
             18)   Salt Lake           370
             19)   San Juan         [80]82
             20)   Sanpete             310
             21)   Sevier              335
             22)   Summit              230
             23)   Tooele              215
             24)   Uintah              285
             25)   Utah                410
             26)   Wasatch             255
             27)   Washington          325
             28)   Wayne               245
             29)   Weber               475

     

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

     

    TABLE 5
    Fruit Orchards


              1)   Beaver                   620
              2)   Box Elder           [670]675
              3)   Cache                    620
              4)   Carbon                   620
              5)   Davis               [675]678
              6)   Duchesne                 620
              7)   Emery                    620
              8)   Garfield                 620
              9)   Grand                    620
             10)   Iron                     620
             11)   Juab                     620
             12)   Kane                     620
             13)   Millard                  620
             14)   Morgan                   620
             15)   Piute                    620
             16)   Salt Lake           [620]623
             17)   San Juan                 620
             18)   Sanpete                  620
             19)   Sevier                   620
             20)   Summit                   620
             21)   Tooele                   620
             22)   Uintah                   620
             23)   Utah                [680]685
             24)   Wasatch                  620
             25)   Washington          [740]743
             26)   Wayne                    620
             27)   Weber               [670]673

     

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

     

    TABLE 6
    Meadow IV


              1)   Beaver              245
              2)   Box Elder           260
              3)   Cache               270
              4)   Carbon              130
              5)   Daggett             160
              6)   Davis               270
              7)   Duchesne            165
              8)   Emery               140
              9)   Garfield            105
             10)   Grand               135
             11)   Iron                262
             12)   Juab                150
             13)   Kane                110
             14)   Millard             195
             15)   Morgan              197
             16)   Piute               192
             17)   Rich                107
             18)   Salt Lake           225
             19)   Sanpete             195
             20)   Sevier              200
             21)   Summit              205
             22)   Tooele              187
             23)   Uintah              207
             24)   Utah                250
             25)   Wasatch             210
             26)   Washington          230
             27)   Wayne               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              [52]55
              2)   Box Elder           [96]97
              3)   Cache             [122]125
              4)   Carbon                  52
              5)   Davis               [50]53
              6)   Duchesne                57
              7)   Garfield                52
              8)   Grand                   52
              9)   Iron                    52
             10)   Juab                    52
             11)   Kane                    52
             12)   Millard                 50
             13)   Morgan              [67]68
             14)   Rich                    52
             15)   Salt Lake           [52]55
             16)   San Juan            [53]55
             17)   Sanpete                 57
             18)   Summit                  52
             19)   Tooele              [52]55
             20)   Uintah                  57
             21)   Utah                    52
             22)   Wasatch                 52
             23)   Washington          [50]52
             24)   Weber               [80]82

     

    (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              [16]17
              2)   Box Elder           [60]61
              3)   Cache               [86]87
              4)   Carbon                  16
              5)   Davis               [15]16
              6)   Duchesne                21
              7)   Garfield                16
              8)   Grand                   16
              9)   Iron                    16
             10)   Juab                    16
             11)   Kane                    16
             12)   Millard                 15
             13)   Morgan                  31
             14)   Rich                    16
             15)   Salt Lake               16
             16)   San Juan            [17]18
             17)   Sanpete                 21
             18)   Summit                  16
             19)   Tooele                  16
             20)   Uintah                  21
             21)   Utah                    16
             22)   Wasatch                 16
             23)   Washington              15
             24)   Weber               [45]47

     

    (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          [75]73
              2)   Box Elder       [76]74
              3)   Cache               72
              4)   Carbon              52
              5)   Daggett         [56]55
              6)   Davis           [62]61
              7)   Duchesne        [71]70
              8)   Emery           [74]73
              9)   Garfield        [79]78
             10)   Grand           [80]79
             11)   Iron                75
             12)   Juab            [66]65
             13)   Kane            [77]76
             14)   Millard         [79]78
             15)   Morgan              68
             16)   Piute           [93]92
             17)   Rich            [67]66
             18)   Salt Lake       [68]67
             19)   San Juan            73
             20)   Sanpete         [65]64
             21)   Sevier          [66]65
             22)   Summit          [74]73
             23)   Tooele          [73]72
             24)   Uintah          [80]82
             25)   Utah                65
             26)   Wasatch             54
             27)   Washington      [68]67
             28)   Wayne           [91]90
             29)   Weber               70

     

    (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              [25]23
              2)   Box Elder           [25]23
              3)   Cache                   23
              4)   Carbon                  16
              5)   Daggett             [16]15
              6)   Davis               [20]19
              7)   Duchesne            [24]23
              8)   Emery               [23]22
              9)   Garfield            [25]24
             10)   Grand               [24]23
             11)   Iron                [24]23
             12)   Juab                [20]19
             13)   Kane                [26]25
             14)   Millard             [26]25
             15)   Morgan                  22
             16)   Piute               [29]28
             17)   Rich                [22]21
             18)   Salt Lake           [22]21
             19)   San Juan                24
             20)   Sanpete             [21]20
             21)   Sevier              [21]20
             22)   Summit              [23]22
             23)   Tooele              [23]22
             24)   Uintah              [26]29
             25)   Utah                    23
             26)   Wasatch                 18
             27)   Washington          [23]22
             28)   Wayne               [30]29
             29)   Weber                   21

     

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

     

    TABLE 11
    GR III


              1)   Beaver                  17
              2)   Box Elder           [18]17
              3)   Cache                   16
              4)   Carbon                  13
              5)   Daggett             [13]12
              6)   Davis               [14]13
              7)   Duchesne            [15]14
              8)   Emery               [16]15
              9)   Garfield            [18]17
             10)   Grand               [17]16
             11)   Iron                [17]16
             12)   Juab                [15]14
             13)   Kane                [17]16
             14)   Millard             [18]17
             15)   Morgan                  14
             16)   Piute               [20]19
             17)   Rich                [15]14
             18)   Salt Lake           [15]14
             19)   San Juan                16
             20)   Sanpete             [15]14
             21)   Sevier              [15]14
             22)   Summit              [16]15
             23)   Tooele              [15]14
             24)   Uintah              [18]20
             25)   Utah                [14]13
             26)   Wasatch                 13
             27)   Washington          [15]14
             28)   Wayne               [20]19
             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              6
              2)   Box Elder           5
              3)   Cache               5
              4)   Carbon              5
              5)   Daggett             5
              6)   Davis               5
              7)   Duchesne            5
              8)   Emery               6
              9)   Garfield            5
             10)   Grand               6
             11)   Iron                6
             12)   Juab                5
             13)   Kane                5
             14)   Millard             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              5
             24)   Uintah              6
             25)   Utah                5
             26)   Wasatch             5
             27)   Washington          5
             28)   Wayne               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: [September 23], 2010

    Notice of Continuation: March 12, 2007

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

     


Document Information

Effective Date:
12/8/2010
Publication Date:
11/01/2010
Filed Date:
10/13/2010
Agencies:
Tax Commission,Property Tax
Rulemaking Authority:

Section 59-2-514

Authorized By:
R. Bruce Johnson, Tax Commission Chair
DAR File No.:
34149
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.