DAR File No. 38904
This rule was published in the November 1, 2014, issue (Vol. 2014, No. 21) of the Utah State Bulletin.
Tax Commission, Property Tax
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
Notice of Proposed Rule
(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 CommissionProperty 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 cj@utah.gov
Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:
12/01/2014
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
Additional Information
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/2014/b20141101.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 to be added is underlined (example). Older browsers may not depict some or any of these attributes on the screen or when the document is printed.
For questions regarding the content or application of this rule, please contact Christa Johnson at the above address, by phone at 801-297-3901, by FAX at 801-297-3907, or by Internet E-mail at cj@utah.gov. For questions about the rulemaking process, please contact the Division of Administrative Rules.