No. 43261 (Amendment): Section R884-24P-53. 2018 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.: 43261
Filed: 10/15/2018 10:45:06 AM

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

These amendments annually update the agricultural productive values to be applied by county assessors to land qualifying for valuation and assessment under the Farmland Assessment Act. These 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 R884-24P-53. This rule sets the acreage value rates for 418 separate class-county combinations. This year it is proposed that one rate increase slightly, 356 rates decrease and 61 have no change.

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 one rate increase slightly, 356 rates decrease 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 these amendments.

local governments:

The amount of savings or cost to local governments 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 one rate increase slightly, 356 rates decrease 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 these amendments. 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:

The amount of savings or cost to small businesses is undetermined. 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 these amendments are minimal.

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

The amount of savings or cost to other persons is undetermined. 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 these amendments are minimal.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

Compliance cost for affected persons ("person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, association, government entity, public or private organization of any character other than an agency): 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 these amendments are minimal.

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

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

Rebecca Rockwell, Commissioner

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

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

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

Jennifer Franklin at the above address, by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at jenniferfranklin@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:

12/03/2018

This rule may become effective on:

12/10/2018

Authorized by:

Rebecca Rockwell, Commissioner

RULE TEXT

Appendix 1: Regulatory Impact Summary Table*

Fiscal Costs

FY 2019

FY 2020

FY 2021

State Government

Local Government

Small Businesses

Non-Small Businesses

Other Person

Total Fiscal Costs:

Fiscal Benefits

State Government

Local Government

Small Businesses

Non-Small Businesses

Other Persons

Total Fiscal Benefits:

Net Fiscal Benefits:

*This table only includes fiscal impacts that could be measured. If there are inestimable fiscal impacts, they will not be included in this table. Inestimable impacts for State Government, Local Government, Small Businesses and Other Persons are described above. Inestimable impacts for Non-Small Businesses are described below.

Appendix 2: Regulatory Impact to Non-Small Businesses

The impacts of this rule change on non-small businesses are inestimable. In the aggregate, the amount of savings or cost to non-small business is undetermined. 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 an individual 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.

Commissioner of the Utah State Tax Commission, Rebecca L. Rockwell, has reviewed and approved this fiscal analysis.

R884. Tax Commission, Property Tax.

R884-24P. Property Tax.

R884-24P-53. [~~2018~~]2019 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.

(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             [758]677 
          2)   Cache                 [654]582 
          3)   Carbon                [501]451 
          4)   Davis                 [804]719 
          5)   Emery                 [476]427 
          6)   Iron                  [759]683 
          7)   Kane                  [398]357 
          8)   Millard               [753]674 
          9)   Salt Lake             [680]616 
         10)   Utah                  [715]641 
         11)   Washington            [620]557 
         12)   Weber                 [769]694

(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             [666]595 
          2)   Cache                 [558]497 
          3)   Carbon                [399]359 
          4)   Davis                 [708]633 
          5)   Duchesne              [465]417 
          6)   Emery                 [383]344 
          7)   Grand                 [367]332 
          8)   Iron                  [665]599 
          9)   Juab                  [424]380 
         10)   Kane                  [306]275 
         11)   Millard               [661]592 
         12)   Salt Lake             [584]529 
         13)   Sanpete               [511]460 
         14)   Sevier                [538]484 
         15)   Summit                [438]393 
         16)   Tooele                [426]381 
         17)   Utah                  [618]554 
         18)   Wasatch               [463]416 
         19)   Washington            [528]475 
         20)   Weber                 [674]608

(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                [532]514 
          2)   Box Elder             [524]468 
          3)   Cache                 [423]376 
          4)   Carbon                [265]239 
          5)   Davis                 [569]509 
          6)   Duchesne              [326]292 
          7)   Emery                 [241]216 
          8)   Garfield              [201]181 
          9)   Grand                 [232]210 
         10)   Iron                  [528]475 
         11)   Juab                  [285]256 
         12)   Kane                  [169]152 
         13)   Millard               [523]468 
         14)   Morgan                [366]328 
         15)   Piute                 [317]285 
         16)   Rich                  [169]152 
         17)   Salt Lake             [445]403 
         18)   San Juan              [163]146 
         19)   Sanpete               [375]338 
         20)   Sevier                [400]360 
         21)   Summit                [299]269 
         22)   Tooele                [285]255 
         23)   Uintah                [353]316 
         24)   Utah                  [474]425 
         25)   Wasatch               [322]289 
         26)   Washington            [388]349 
         27)   Wayne                 [313]281 
         28)   Weber                 [536]483

(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                [438]424 
          2)   Box Elder             [433]387 
          3)   Cache                 [328]292 
          4)   Carbon                [170]153 
          5)   Daggett               [180]162 
          6)   Davis                 [475]425 
          7)   Duchesne              [229]205 
          8)   Emery                 [149]134 
          9)   Garfield              [108]97 
         10)   Grand                 [140]127 
         11)   Iron                  [432]389 
         12)   Juab                  [189]170 
         13)   Kane                  [76]68 
         14)   Millard               [425]380 
         15)   Morgan                [271]243 
         16)   Piute                 [222]199 
         17)   Rich                  [78]70 
         18)   Salt Lake             [344]312 
         19)   San Juan              [74]66 
         20)   Sanpete               [282]254 
         21)   Sevier                [307]276 
         22)   Summit                [206]185 
         23)   Tooele                [194]174 
         24)   Uintah                [261]234 
         25)   Utah                  [381]341 
         26)   Wasatch               [229]206 
         27)   Washington            [292]263 
         28)   Wayne                 [220]198 
         29)   Weber                 [438]395

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

TABLE 5
Fruit Orchards

 
           1)   Beaver                [620]586 
          2)   Box Elder             [671]634 
          3)   Cache                 [620]586 
          4)   Carbon                [620]586 
          5)   Davis                 [676]639 
          6)   Duchesne              [620]586 
          7)   Emery                 [620]586 
          8)   Garfield              [620]586 
          9)   Grand                 [620]586 
         10)   Iron                  [620]586 
         11)   Juab                  [620]586 
         12)   Kane                  [620]586 
         13)   Millard               [620]586 
         14)   Morgan                [620]586 
         15)   Piute                 [620]586 
         16)   Salt Lake             [620]586 
         17)   San Juan              [620]586 
         18)   Sanpete               [620]586 
         19)   Sevier                [620]586 
         20)   Summit                [620]586 
         21)   Tooele                [620]586 
         22)   Uintah                [620]586 
         23)   Utah                  [681]644 
         24)   Wasatch               [620]586 
         25)   Washington            [733]693 
         26)   Wayne                 [620]586 
         27)   Weber                 [676]639

TABLE 6
Meadow IV

 
           1)   Beaver                [225]218 
          2)   Box Elder             [242]216 
          3)   Cache                 [251]223 
          4)   Carbon                [125]113 
          5)   Daggett               [149]134 
          6)   Davis                 [253]226 
          7)   Duchesne              [159]143 
          8)   Emery                 [132]118 
          9)   Garfield              [99]89 
         10)   Grand                 [127]115 
         11)   Iron                  [250]225 
         12)   Juab                  [145]130 
         13)   Kane                  [104]93 
         14)   Millard               [185]166 
         15)   Morgan                [187]168 
         16)   Piute                 [181]163 
         17)   Rich                  [100]90 
         18)   Salt Lake             [218]198 
         19)   Sanpete               [185]167 
         20)   Sevier                [191]172 
         21)   Summit                [193]173 
         22)   Tooele                [177]158 
         23)   Uintah                [198]177 
         24)   Utah                  [239]214 
         25)   Wasatch               [199]179 
         26)   Washington            [217]195 
         27)   Wayne                 [164]147 
         28)   Weber                 [287]259

(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                [49]47 
          2)   Box Elder             [88]79 
          3)   Cache                 [112]100 
          4)   Carbon                [47]42 
          5)   Davis                 [49]44 
          6)   Duchesne              [52]47 
          7)   Garfield              [46]41 
          8)   Grand                 [47]42 
          9)   Iron                  [47]42 
         10)   Juab                  [49]44 
         11)   Kane                  [46]41 
         12)   Millard               [45]40 
         13)   Morgan                [61]55 
         14)   Rich                  [46]41 
         15)   Salt Lake             [52]47 
         16)   San Juan              [50]45 
         17)   Sanpete               [52]47 
         18)   Summit                [46]41 
         19)   Tooele                [50]45 
         20)   Uintah                [52]47 
         21)   Utah                  [48]43 
         22)   Wasatch               [46]41 
         23)   Washington            [46]41 
         24)   Weber                 [75]68

(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                14 
          2)   Box Elder             [56]50 
          3)   Cache                 [79]70 
          4)   Carbon                [14]13 
          5)   Davis                 [15]13 
          6)   Duchesne              [18]16 
          7)   Garfield              [14]13 
          8)   Grand                 [14]13 
          9)   Iron                  [14]13 
         10)   Juab                  [15]13 
         11)   Kane                  [14]13 
         12)   Millard               [13]12 
         13)   Morgan                [26]23 
         14)   Rich                  [14]13 
         15)   Salt Lake             15 
         16)   San Juan              [16]17 
         17)   Sanpete               [18]16 
         18)   Summit                [14]13 
         19)   Tooele                [14]13 
         20)   Uintah                [18]16 
         21)   Utah                  [15]13 
         22)   Wasatch               [14]13 
         23)   Washington            [13]12 
         24)   Weber                 [42]38

(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                [67]65 
          2)   Box Elder             [71]63 
          3)   Cache                 [67]60 
          4)   Carbon                [50]45 
          5)   Daggett               [50]45 
          6)   Davis                 [58]52 
          7)   Duchesne              [66]59 
          8)   Emery                 [68]61 
          9)   Garfield              [73]66 
         10)   Grand                 [74]67 
         11)   Iron                  [71]64 
         12)   Juab                  [62]56 
         13)   Kane                  [72]65 
         14)   Millard               [73]65 
         15)   Morgan                [64]57 
         16)   Piute                 [86]77 
         17)   Rich                  [62]56 
         18)   Salt Lake             [67]61 
         19)   San Juan              [71]63 
         20)   Sanpete               [60]54 
         21)   Sevier                [62]56 
         22)   Summit                [69]62 
         23)   Tooele                [68]61 
         24)   Uintah                [77]69 
         25)   Utah                  [63]56 
         26)   Wasatch               [50]45 
         27)   Washington            [62]56 
         28)   Wayne                 [84]75 
         29)   Weber                 [67]60

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

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

TABLE 11
GR III

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

(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                5 
          2)   Box Elder             5 
          3)   Cache                 5 
          4)   Carbon                5 
          5)   Daggett               5 
          6)   Davis                 5 
          7)   Duchesne              5 
          8)   Emery                 5 
          9)   Garfield              5 
         10)   Grand                 5 
         11)   Iron                  5 
         12)   Juab                  5 
         13)   Kane                  5 
         14)   Millard               5 
         15)   Morgan                5 
         16)   Piute                 5 
         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                5 
         25)   Utah                  5 
         26)   Wasatch               5 
         27)   Washington            5 
         28)   Wayne                 5 
         29)   Weber                 5

(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: [~~November 30, 2017~~]2018

Notice of Continuation: November 10, 2016

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

Visit the Official Version

Document Information

Effective Date:: 12/10/2018
Publication Date:: 11/01/2018
Type:: Notices of Proposed Rules
Filed Date:: 10/15/2018
Agencies:: Tax Commission, Property Tax
Rulemaking Authority:: Section 59-2-515
Authorized By:: Rebecca Rockwell, Commissioner
DAR File No.:: 43261
Summary:: 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 R884-24P-53. This rule sets the acreage value rates for 418 separate class-county combinations. This year it is proposed that one rate increase slightly, 356 rates decrease and 61 have no change.
CodeNo:: R884-24P-53
CodeName:: {49359|R884-24P-53|R884-24P-53. 2018 Valuation Guides for Valuation of Land Subject to the Farmland Assessment Act Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 59-2-515}
Link Address:: Tax CommissionProperty Tax210 N 1950 WSALT LAKE CITY, UT 84134
Link Way:: Jennifer Franklin, by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at jenniferfranklin@utah.gov
AdditionalInfo:: More information about a Notice of Proposed Rule is available online. The Portable Document Format (PDF) version of the Bulletin is the official version. The PDF version of this issue is available at https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bull_pdf/2018/b20181101.pdf. The HTML edition of the Bulletin is a convenience copy. Any discrepancy between the PDF version and HTML version is resolved in favor of the PDF version. Text to be deleted is struck through and surrounded by brackets ([example]). Text ...
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.