DAR File No. 42165
This rule was published in the October 15, 2017, issue (Vol. 2017, No. 20) of the Utah State Bulletin.
Tax Commission, Property Tax
Section R884-24P-53
2017 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.: 42165
Filed: 09/28/2017 10:06:34 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. The rule sets the acreage value rates for 418 separate class-county combinations.
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 the 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 it is proposed that 108 rates increase slightly, 251 decrease slightly, and 59 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 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 108 rates increase slightly, 251 decrease slightly, and 59 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 small business 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 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 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:
11/14/2017
This rule may become effective on:
11/21/2017
Authorized by:
Rebecca Rockwell, Commissioner
RULE TEXT
R884. Tax Commission, Property Tax.
R884-24P. Property Tax.
R884-24P-53. [2017]2018
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 [799]758
2) Cache [688]654
3) Carbon [525]501
4) Davis [853]804
5) Emery [498]476
6) Iron [793]759
7) Kane [417]398
8) Millard [788]753
9) Salt Lake [711]680
10) Utah [749]715
11) Washington [649]620
12) Weber [803]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 [702]666
2) Cache [587]558
3) Carbon [418]399
4) Davis [751]708
5) Duchesne [486]465
6) Emery [401]383
7) Grand [383]367
8) Iron [695]665
9) Juab [444]424
10) Kane [320]306
11) Millard [691]661
12) Salt Lake [611]584
13) Sanpete [535]511
14) Sevier [562]538
15) Summit [459]438
16) Tooele [447]426
17) Utah [648]618
18) Wasatch [485]463
19) Washington [553]528
20) Weber [704]674
(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 [557]532
2) Box Elder [552]524
3) Cache [445]423
4) Carbon [277]265
5) Davis [603]569
6) Duchesne [341]326
7) Emery [252]241
8) Garfield [210]201
9) Grand [242]232
10) Iron [552]528
11) Juab [299]285
12) Kane [177]169
13) Millard [547]523
14) Morgan [384]366
15) Piute [332]317
16) Rich [177]169
17) Salt Lake [465]445
18) San Juan [173]163
19) Sanpete [392]375
20) Sevier [418]400
21) Summit [313]299
22) Tooele [299]285
23) Uintah [370]353
24) Utah [497]474
25) Wasatch [337]322
26) Washington [406]388
27) Wayne [328]313
28) Weber [560]536
(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 [458]438
2) Box Elder [456]433
3) Cache [345]328
4) Carbon [178]170
5) Daggett [188]180
6) Davis [504]475
7) Duchesne [239]229
8) Emery [156]149
9) Garfield [113]108
10) Grand [146]140
11) Iron [451]432
12) Juab [198]189
13) Kane [80]76
14) Millard [445]425
15) Morgan [285]271
16) Piute [232]222
17) Rich [82]78
18) Salt Lake [360]344
19) San Juan [79]74
20) Sanpete [295]282
21) Sevier [320]307
22) Summit [216]206
23) Tooele [204]194
24) Uintah [273]261
25) Utah [399]381
26) Wasatch [240]229
27) Washington [306]292
28) Wayne [231]220
29) Weber [457]438
(b) Fruit orchards shall be assessed per acre based upon the following schedule:
TABLE 5
Fruit Orchards
1) Beaver [614]620
2) Box Elder [665]671
3) Cache [614]620
4) Carbon [614]620
5) Davis [670]676
6) Duchesne [614]620
7) Emery [614]620
8) Garfield [614]620
9) Grand [614]620
10) Iron [614]620
11) Juab [614]620
12) Kane [614]620
13) Millard [614]620
14) Morgan [614]620
15) Piute [614]620
16) Salt Lake [614]620
17) San Juan [614]620
18) Sanpete [614]620
19) Sevier [614]620
20) Summit [614]620
21) Tooele [614]620
22) Uintah [614]620
23) Utah [675]681
24) Wasatch [614]620
25) Washington [726]733
26) Wayne [614]620
27) Weber [670]676
(c) Meadow IV property shall be assessed per acre based upon the following schedule:
TABLE 6
Meadow IV
1) Beaver [235]225
2) Box Elder [255]242
3) Cache [264]251
4) Carbon [131]125
5) Daggett [156]149
6) Davis [268]253
7) Duchesne [166]159
8) Emery [138]132
9) Garfield [104]99
10) Grand [133]127
11) Iron [261]250
12) Juab [152]145
13) Kane [109]104
14) Millard [193]185
15) Morgan [196]187
16) Piute [190]181
17) Rich [105]100
18) Salt Lake [228]218
19) Sanpete [193]185
20) Sevier [199]191
21) Summit [202]193
22) Tooele [186]177
23) Uintah [207]198
24) Utah [251]239
25) Wasatch [208]199
26) Washington [227]217
27) Wayne [172]164
28) Weber [300]287
(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 [51]49
2) Box Elder [93]88
3) Cache [118]112
4) Carbon [49]47
5) Davis [52]49
6) Duchesne [54]52
7) Garfield [48]46
8) Grand [49]47
9) Iron [49]47
10) Juab [51]49
11) Kane [48]46
12) Millard [47]45
13) Morgan [64]61
14) Rich [48]46
15) Salt Lake [54]52
16) San Juan [53]50
17) Sanpete [54]52
18) Summit [48]46
19) Tooele [52]50
20) Uintah [54]52
21) Utah [50]48
22) Wasatch [48]46
23) Washington [48]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 [15]14
2) Box Elder [59]56
3) Cache [83]79
4) Carbon [15]14
5) Davis [16]15
6) Duchesne [19]18
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 [28]26
14) Rich [15]14
15) Salt Lake 15
16) San Juan [17]16
17) Sanpete [19]18
18) Summit [15]14
19) Tooele 14
20) Uintah [19]18
21) Utah [16]15
22) Wasatch [15]14
23) Washington [14]13
24) Weber [45]42
(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 [70]67
2) Box Elder [75]71
3) Cache [70]67
4) Carbon [52]50
5) Daggett [52]50
6) Davis [61]58
7) Duchesne [69]66
8) Emery [72]68
9) Garfield [76]73
10) Grand [78]74
11) Iron [74]71
12) Juab [65]62
13) Kane [75]72
14) Millard [76]73
15) Morgan [67]64
16) Piute [91]86
17) Rich [65]62
18) Salt Lake [70]67
19) San Juan [75]71
20) Sanpete [63]60
21) Sevier [64]62
22) Summit [72]69
23) Tooele [71]68
24) Uintah [80]77
25) Utah [66]63
26) Wasatch [53]50
27) Washington [65]62
28) Wayne [89]84
29) Weber [70]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 [22]21
2) Box Elder [23]22
3) Cache [23]21
4) Carbon [15]14
5) Daggett [14]13
6) Davis [19]18
7) Duchesne [22]18
8) Emery [21]20
9) Garfield [23]22
10) Grand [22]21
11) Iron [22]21
12) Juab [19]18
13) Kane [24]23
14) Millard [24]23
15) Morgan [21]20
16) Piute [26]25
17) Rich [20]19
18) Salt Lake [22]20
19) San Juan [24]23
20) Sanpete [18]17
21) Sevier [18]17
22) Summit [20]19
23) Tooele [20]19
24) Uintah [29]27
25) Utah [23]22
26) Wasatch [17]16
27) Washington [21]20
28) Wayne [29]27
29) Weber [20]19
(iii) Graze III. The following counties shall assess Graze III property based upon the per acre values below:
TABLE 11
GR III
1) Beaver [16]15
2) Box Elder [17]16
3) Cache [15]14
4) Carbon [13]12
5) Daggett 11
6) Davis [13]12
7) Duchesne 13
8) Emery [14]13
9) Garfield [16]15
10) Grand [15]14
11) Iron [15]14
12) Juab 13
13) Kane [15]14
14) Millard [16]15
15) Morgan [13]12
16) Piute [18]17
17) Rich [13]12
18) Salt Lake [15]14
19) San Juan [17]16
20) Sanpete 13
21) Sevier 13
22) Summit [14]13
23) Tooele 13
24) Uintah [19]18
25) Utah [14]13
26) Wasatch 12
27) Washington [13]12
28) Wayne [18]17
29) Weber [14]13
(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]5
2) Box Elder 5
3) Cache 5
4) Carbon 5
5) Daggett 5
6) Davis 5
7) Duchesne 5
8) Emery [6]5
9) Garfield 5
10) Grand [6]5
11) Iron [6]5
12) Juab 5
13) Kane 5
14) Millard 5
15) Morgan [6]5
16) Piute [6]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 [6]5
25) Utah 5
26) Wasatch 5
27) Washington 5
28) Wayne 5
29) Weber [6]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: [2016]2017
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/2017/b20171015.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 Office of Administrative Rules.