No. 38058 (Amendment): Section R884-24P-53. 2013 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.: 38058
Filed: 10/10/2013 11:47:33 AM

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 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. Irrigated farm land values decreased in all counties primarily due to declines in production and increases in costs; average decline across all counties was approximately 6%. Orchard land values declined in all counties due to cost increases more than offsetting production/ price increases. Only marginal decreases were made to meadow cropland values being impacted by the decreasing value of feeds/forages and increasing costs. Dry farm land values decreased across all counties due to amount of precipitation received and increased costs. Grazing land values were negatively impacted by forage prices, precipitation levels, livestock prices, and production costs. No change in value was recommended for non-productive land.

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 Education Fund based on increased or decreased real and personal property valuation, including property assessed under the FAA. Property valuation (taxable value) changes have been recommended by class and by county. This year, no class/county valuations will increase, 302 will decrease and 162 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 2014 and a listing of property no longer qualifying that is removed from FAA during 2013. 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, no class/county valuations will increase, 302 will decrease and 162 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 2014 and a listing of property no longer qualifying that is removed from FAA during 2013. 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 no such value indicators will increase, 303 will decrease and 162 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 2014 and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from FAA during 2013. 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 no such value indicators will increase, 303 will decrease and 162 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 2014 and a listing of property no longer qualifying which is removed from FAA during 2013. 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 no such value indicators will increase, 303 will decrease and 162 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. 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:

These changes may affect property values which may result in a change of property tax amounts due.

Robert Pero, 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:

• Christa Johnson at the above address, by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at 801-297-3907, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

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:

12/02/2013

This rule may become effective on:

12/09/2013

Authorized by:

Robert Pero, Commissioner

RULE TEXT

R884. Tax Commission, Property Tax.

R884-24P. Property Tax.

R884-24P-53. [ 2013 ] 2014 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 qualifying for agricultural use assessment pursuant to Section 59-2-503 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                [872]820           2)   Cache                    [752]707           3)   Carbon                   [560]525           4)   Davis                    [914]870           5)   Emery                    [537]504           6)   Iron                     [851]801           7)   Kane                     [449]422           8)   Millard                  [853]804           9)   Salt Lake                [763]710          10)   Utah                     [801]755          11)   Washington               [703]659          12)   Weber                    [856]808

 

(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                [766]720           2)   Cache                    [642]603           3)   Carbon                   [446]418           4)   Davis                    [803]764           5)   Duchesne                 [523]490           6)   Emery                    [432]406           7)   Grand                    [414]389           8)   Iron                     [746]701           9)   Juab                     [477]450          10)   Kane                     [345]324          11)   Millard                  [748]705          12)   Salt Lake                [656]610          13)   Sanpete                  [576]542          14)   Sevier                   [602]567          15)   Summit                   [497]466          16)   Tooele                   [487]456          17)   Utah                     [693]653          18)   Wasatch                  [524]492          19)   Washington               [599]561          20)   Weber                    [751]709

 

(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                   [610]574           2)   Box Elder                [603]567           3)   Cache                    [487]458           4)   Carbon                   [295]277           5)   Davis                    [646]615           6)   Duchesne                 [367]344           7)   Emery                    [272]255           8)   Garfield                 [227]213           9)   Grand                    [261]245          10)   Iron                     [593]557          11)   Juab                     [321]303          12)   Kane                     [191]179          13)   Millard                  [592]558          14)   Morgan                   [416]391          15)   Piute                    [358]336          16)   Rich                     [191]179          17)   Salt Lake                [499]464          18)   San Juan                 [195]181          19)   Sanpete                  [422]397          20)   Sevier                   [448]422          21)   Summit                   [338]317          22)   Tooele                   [326]305          23)   Uintah                   [397]375          24)   Utah                     [531]501          25)   Wasatch                  [364]342          26)   Washington               [440]413          27)   Wayne                    [354]332          28)   Weber                    [597]564

 

(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                   [502]472           2)   Box Elder                [498]468           3)   Cache                    [378]355           4)   Carbon                   [190]178           5)   Daggett                  [208]195           6)   Davis                    [540]514           7)   Duchesne                 [257]241           8)   Emery                    [169]158           9)   Garfield                 [122]115          10)   Grand                    [158]149          11)   Iron                     [484]455          12)   Juab                     [213]201          13)   Kane                      [87]82          14)   Millard                  [482]454          15)   Morgan                   [308]289          16)   Piute                    [250]235          17)   Rich                      [89]83          18)   Salt Lake                [387]360          19)   San Juan                  [89]83          20)   Sanpete                  [317]298          21)   Sevier                   [343]324          22)   Summit                   [234]220          23)   Tooele                   [222]208          24)   Uintah                   [293]277          25)   Utah                     [427]403          26)   Wasatch                  [260]244          27)   Washington               [331]310          28)   Wayne                    [250]234          29)   Weber                    [487]461

 

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

 

TABLE 5
Fruit Orchards

            1)   Beaver                   [588]574           2)   Box Elder                [637]622           3)   Cache                    [588]574           4)   Carbon                   [588]574           5)   Davis                    [642]627           6)   Duchesne                 [588]574           7)   Emery                    [588]574           8)   Garfield                 [588]574           9)   Grand                    [588]574          10)   Iron                     [588]574          11)   Juab                     [588]574          12)   Kane                     [588]574          13)   Millard                  [588]574          14)   Morgan                   [588]574          15)   Piute                    [588]574          16)   Salt Lake                [588]574          17)   San Juan                 [588]586          18)   Sanpete                  [588]574          19)   Sevier                   [588]574          20)   Summit                   [588]574          21)   Tooele                   [588]574          22)   Uintah                   [588]574          23)   Utah                     [647]631          24)   Wasatch                  [588]574          25)   Washington               [696]679          26)   Wayne                    [588]574          27)   Weber                    [642]627

 

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

 

TABLE 6
Meadow IV

            1)   Beaver                   [247]243           2)   Box Elder                [266]262           3)   Cache                    [275]271           4)   Carbon                   [133]131           5)   Daggett                  [163]161           6)   Davis                    [278]274           7)   Duchesne                 [170]168           8)   Emery                    [142]140           9)   Garfield                 [107]105          10)   Grand                    [137]135          11)   Iron                     [268]264          12)   Juab                     [156]154          13)   Kane                     [112]110          14)   Millard                  [200]197          15)   Morgan                   [202]199          16)   Piute                    [196]193          17)   Rich                     [108]106          18)   Salt Lake                [231]228          19)   Sanpete                  [199]196          20)   Sevier                   [204]201          21)   Summit                   [207]204          22)   Tooele                   [192]189          23)   Uintah                   [212]209          24)   Utah                     [257]253          25)   Wasatch                  [214]211          26)   Washington               [234]231          27)   Wayne                    [177]174          28)   Weber                    [311]303

 

(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                    [56]53           2)   Box Elder                [102]96           3)   Cache                    [129]121           4)   Carbon                    [53]50           5)   Davis                     [55]52           6)   Duchesne                  [58]54           7)   Garfield                  [52]49           8)   Grand                     [53]50           9)   Iron                      [53]50          10)   Juab                      [54]51          11)   Kane                      [52]49          12)   Millard                   [51]48          13)   Morgan                    [69]65          14)   Rich                      [52]49          15)   Salt Lake                 [58]54          16)   San Juan                  [59]55          17)   Sanpete                   [58]55          18)   Summit                    [52]49          19)   Tooele                    [56]52          20)   Uintah                    [58]55          21)   Utah                      [54]51          22)   Wasatch                   [52]49          23)   Washington                [52]49          24)   Weber                     [83]78

 

(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                    [17]16           2)   Box Elder                 [64]60           3)   Cache                     [90]85           4)   Carbon                    [16]15           5)   Davis                     [17]16           6)   Duchesne                  [21]20           7)   Garfield                  [16]15           8)   Grand                     [16]15           9)   Iron                      [16]15          10)   Juab                      [17]16          11)   Kane                      [16]15          12)   Millard                   [15]14          13)   Morgan                    [31]29          14)   Rich                      [16]15          15)   Salt Lake                 [17]16          16)   San Juan                  [19]18          17)   Sanpete                   [21]20          18)   Summit                    [16]15          19)   Tooele                    [16]15          20)   Uintah                    [21]20          21)   Utah                      [17]16          22)   Wasatch                   [16]15          23)   Washington                [15]14          24)   Weber                     [48]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                    [75]74           2)   Box Elder                 [76]75           3)   Cache                     [73]72           4)   Carbon                    [53]52           5)   Daggett                   [54]53           6)   Davis                     [62]61           7)   Duchesne                  [70]69           8)   Emery                     [73]72           9)   Garfield                  [80]79          10)   Grand                     [81]80          11)   Iron                      [77]76          12)   Juab                      [66]65          13)   Kane                      [75]74          14)   Millard                   [79]78          15)   Morgan                    [69]68          16)   Piute                     [92]91          17)   Rich                      [67]66          18)   Salt Lake                 [70]69          19)   San Juan                  [80]79          20)   Sanpete                   [64]63          21)   Sevier                    [65]64          22)   Summit                    [74]73          23)   Tooele                    [73]72          24)   Uintah                    [84]83          25)   Utah                      [67]66          26)   Wasatch                   [53]52          27)   Washington                [66]65          28)   Wayne                     [91]90          29)   Weber                     [72]71

 

(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                    23           2)   Box Elder                 23           3)   Cache                     24           4)   Carbon                    16           5)   Daggett                   15           6)   Davis                     20           7)   Duchesne                  23           8)   Emery                     22           9)   Garfield                  24          10)   Grand                     23          11)   Iron                      23          12)   Juab                      20          13)   Kane                      24          14)   Millard                   25          15)   Morgan                    22          16)   Piute                     27          17)   Rich                      21          18)   Salt Lake                 22          19)   San Juan                  26          20)   Sanpete                   19          21)   Sevier                    19          22)   Summit                    21          23)   Tooele                    21          24)   Uintah                    29          25)   Utah                      24          26)   Wasatch                   18          27)   Washington                22          28)   Wayne                     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           3)   Cache                     16           4)   Carbon                    13           5)   Daggett                   12           6)   Davis                     13           7)   Duchesne                  14           8)   Emery                     15           9)   Garfield                  17          10)   Grand                     16          11)   Iron                      16          12)   Juab                      14          13)   Kane                      16          14)   Millard                   17          15)   Morgan                    14          16)   Piute                     19          17)   Rich                      14          18)   Salt Lake                 15          19)   San Juan                  17          20)   Sanpete                   14          21)   Sevier                    14          22)   Summit                    15          23)   Tooele                    14          24)   Uintah                    20          25)   Utah                      14          26)   Wasatch                   13          27)   Washington                14          28)   Wayne                     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: [February 21, ]2013

Notice of Continuation: January 3, 2012

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: Art. XIII, Sec 2; 9-2-201; 11-13-302; 41-1a-202; 41-1a-301; 59-1-210; 59-2-102; 59-2-103; 59-2-103.5; 59-2-104; 59-2-201; 59-2-210; 59-2-211; 59-2-301; 59-2-301.3; 59-2-302; 59-2-303; 59-2-303.1; 59-2-305; 59-2-306; 59-2-401; 59-2-402; 59-2-404; 59-2-405; 59-2-405.1; 59-2-406; 59-2-508; 59-2-514; 59-2-515; 59-2-701; 59-2-702; 59-2-703; 59-2-704; 59-2-704.5; 59-2-705; 59-2-801; 59-2-918 through 59-2-924; 59-2-1002; 59-2-1004; 59-2-1005; 59-2-1006; 59-2-1101; 59-2-1102; 59-2-1104; 59-2-1106; 59-2-1107 through 59-2-1109; 59-2-1113; 59-2-1115; 59-2-1202; 59-2-1202(5); 59-2-1302; 59-2-1303; 59-2-1308.5; 59-2-1317; 59-2-1328; 59-2-1330; 59-2-1347; 59-2-1351; 59-2-1365; 59-2-1703

 

---