No. 38904 (Amendment): Section R884-24P-53. 2014 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.: 38904
Filed: 10/09/2014 11:58:22 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. 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. The rule sets the acreage value rates for 418 separate class-county combinations.

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 Farmland Assessment Act (FAA). Property valuation (taxable value) changes have been recommended by class and by county. This year it is proposed that 249 rates decrease slightly, 108 increase slightly and 61 have no change. No total cost or savings can be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class and a listing of property newly qualifying or no longer qualifying for FAA in the coming year. 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 it is proposed that 249 rates decrease slightly, 108 increase slightly and 61 have no change. No total cost or savings can be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class and a listing of property newly qualifying or no longer qualifying for FAA in the coming year. However, it is estimated that the overall change is minimal due to this amendment. County assessors' 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. The effect on the property owner will depend on the mix of property types and situs. No total cost or savings can be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class and a listing of property newly qualifying or no longer qualifying for FAA in the coming year. In addition, the cost will be further 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. The effect on the property owner will depend on the mix of property types and situs. No total cost or savings can be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class and a listing of property newly qualifying or no longer qualifying for FAA in the coming year. In addition, the cost will be further 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. The effect on the property owner will depend on the mix of property types and situs. No total cost or savings can be calculated without an exhaustive study of farmland acreage in each county by class and a listing of property newly qualifying or no longer qualifying for FAA in the coming year. In addition, the cost will be further 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:

12/01/2014

This rule may become effective on:

12/08/2014

Authorized by:

Robert Pero, Commissioner

RULE TEXT

R884. Tax Commission, Property Tax.

R884-24P. Property Tax.

R884-24P-53. [2014]2015 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                [820]798           2)   Cache                    [707]674           3)   Carbon                   [525]500           4)   Davis                    [870]835           5)   Emery                    [504]479           6)   Iron                     [801]760           7)   Kane                     [422]401           8)   Millard                  [804]764           9)   Salt Lake                [710]695          10)   Utah                     [755]730          11)   Washington               [659]624          12)   Weber                    [808]769

 

(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]701           2)   Cache                    [603]576           3)   Carbon                   [418]398           4)   Davis                    [764]734           5)   Duchesne                 [490]468           6)   Emery                    [406]385           7)   Grand                    [389]370           8)   Iron                     [701]666           9)   Juab                     [450]432          10)   Kane                     [324]308          11)   Millard                  [705]670          12)   Salt Lake                [610]597          13)   Sanpete                  [542]515          14)   Sevier                   [567]539          15)   Summit                   [466]441          16)   Tooele                   [456]434          17)   Utah                     [653]631          18)   Wasatch                  [492]467          19)   Washington               [561]532          20)   Weber                    [709]675

 

(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                   [574]546           2)   Box Elder                [567]552           3)   Cache                    [458]437           4)   Carbon                   [277]263           5)   Davis                    [615]590           6)   Duchesne                 [344]328           7)   Emery                    [255]242           8)   Garfield                 [213]202           9)   Grand                    [245]233          10)   Iron                     [557]530          11)   Juab                     [303]291          12)   Kane                     [179]171          13)   Millard                  [558]530          14)   Morgan                   [391]371          15)   Piute                    [336]319          16)   Rich                     [179]170          17)   Salt Lake                [464]454          18)   San Juan                 [181]178          19)   Sanpete                  [397]377          20)   Sevier                   [422]401          21)   Summit                   [317]300          22)   Tooele                   [305]290          23)   Uintah                   [375]356          24)   Utah                     [501]484          25)   Wasatch                  [342]325          26)   Washington               [413]391          27)   Wayne                    [332]315          28)   Weber                    [564]537

 

(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                   [472]449           2)   Box Elder                [468]456           3)   Cache                    [355]339           4)   Carbon                   [178]170           5)   Daggett                  [195]185           6)   Davis                    [514]494           7)   Duchesne                 [241]230           8)   Emery                    [158]151           9)   Garfield                 [115]108          10)   Grand                    [149]141          11)   Iron                     [455]432          12)   Juab                     [201]193          13)   Kane                      [82]78          14)   Millard                  [454]432          15)   Morgan                   [289]274          16)   Piute                    [235]223          17)   Rich                      [83]79          18)   Salt Lake                [360]352          19)   San Juan                  [83]81          20)   Sanpete                  [298]283          21)   Sevier                   [324]307          22)   Summit                   [220]208          23)   Tooele                   [208]198          24)   Uintah                   [277]263          25)   Utah                     [403]389          26)   Wasatch                  [244]232          27)   Washington               [310]294          28)   Wayne                    [234]222          29)   Weber                    [461]438

 

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

 

TABLE 5
Fruit Orchards

            1)   Beaver                   [574]603           2)   Box Elder                [622]653           3)   Cache                    [574]603           4)   Carbon                   [574]603           5)   Davis                    [627]658           6)   Duchesne                 [574]603           7)   Emery                    [574]603           8)   Garfield                 [574]603           9)   Grand                    [574]603          10)   Iron                     [574]603          11)   Juab                     [574]603          12)   Kane                     [574]603          13)   Millard                  [574]603          14)   Morgan                   [574]603          15)   Piute                    [574]603          16)   Salt Lake                [574]603          17)   San Juan                 [586]603          18)   Sanpete                  [574]603          19)   Sevier                   [574]603          20)   Summit                   [574]603          21)   Tooele                   [574]603          22)   Uintah                   [574]603          23)   Utah                     [631]603          24)   Wasatch                  [574]603          25)   Washington               [679]713          26)   Wayne                    [574]603          27)   Weber                    [627]658

 

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

 

TABLE 6
Meadow IV

            1)   Beaver                   [243]231           2)   Box Elder                [262]255           3)   Cache                    [271]259           4)   Carbon                   [131]125           5)   Daggett                  [161]153           6)   Davis                    [274]263           7)   Duchesne                 [168]160           8)   Emery                    [140]133           9)   Garfield                 [105]100          10)   Grand                    [135]128          11)   Iron                     [264]251          12)   Juab                     [154]148          13)   Kane                     [110]105          14)   Millard                  [197]187          15)   Morgan                   [199]189          16)   Piute                    [193]183          17)   Rich                     [106]100          18)   Salt Lake                [228]223          19)   Sanpete                  [196]186          20)   Sevier                   [201]191          21)   Summit                   [204]193          22)   Tooele                   [189]180          23)   Uintah                   [209]199          24)   Utah                     [253]244          25)   Wasatch                  [211]200          26)   Washington               [231]219          27)   Wayne                    [174]165          28)   Weber                    [303]288

 

(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                    [53]50           2)   Box Elder                 [96]93           3)   Cache                    [121]116           4)   Carbon                    [50]47           5)   Davis                     [52]50           6)   Duchesne                  [54]52           7)   Garfield                  [49]46           8)   Grand                     [50]47           9)   Iron                      [50]47          10)   Juab                      [51]49          11)   Kane                      [49]46          12)   Millard                   [48]46          13)   Morgan                    [65]61          14)   Rich                      [49]46          15)   Salt Lake                 [54]53          16)   San Juan                  [55]54          17)   Sanpete                   [55]52          18)   Summit                    [49]46          19)   Tooele                    [52]50          20)   Uintah                    [55]52          21)   Utah                      [51]49          22)   Wasatch                   [49]46          23)   Washington                [49]46          24)   Weber                     [78]75

 

(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]15           2)   Box Elder                 [60]59           3)   Cache                     [85]81           4)   Carbon                    [15]14           5)   Davis                     16           6)   Duchesne                  [20]19           7)   Garfield                  [15]14           8)   Grand                     [15]14           9)   Iron                      [15]14          10)   Juab                      [16]15          11)   Kane                      [15]14          12)   Millard                   [14]13          13)   Morgan                    [29]28          14)   Rich                      [15]14          15)   Salt Lake                 [16]15          16)   San Juan                  [18]17          17)   Sanpete                   [20]19          18)   Summit                    [15]14          19)   Tooele                    [15]14          20)   Uintah                    [20]19          21)   Utah                      [16]15          22)   Wasatch                   [15]14          23)   Washington                [14]13          24)   Weber                     [45]43

 

(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                    [74]69           2)   Box Elder                 75           3)   Cache                     [72]70           4)   Carbon                    [52]50           5)   Daggett                   [53]51           6)   Davis                     [61]60           7)   Duchesne                  [69]67           8)   Emery                     [72]69           9)   Garfield                  [79]74          10)   Grand                     [80]75          11)   Iron                      [76]71          12)   Juab                      [65]63          13)   Kane                      [74]72          14)   Millard                   [78]74          15)   Morgan                    [68]64          16)   Piute                     [91]87          17)   Rich                      [66]63          18)   Salt Lake                 [69]68          19)   San Juan                  [79]77          20)   Sanpete                   [63]61          21)   Sevier                    [64]62          22)   Summit                    [73]69          23)   Tooele                    [72]68          24)   Uintah                    [83]78          25)   Utah                      [66]65          26)   Wasatch                   [52]51          27)   Washington                [65]63          28)   Wayne                     [90]85          29)   Weber                     [71]67

 

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

 

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

 

(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: [October 23, ]2014

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

 

---