[Terry W]

ASHTABULA County, Ohio is being subjected to 'drive-by' appraisals-- looking to eliminate CAUV status for people who are 'not farming'-- so, city folk are determining that a hayfield or greenhouse is not a farm activity, but an overweight mini-horse with a 'tude is--- these 'appraisers' are demanding 'reciepts' from long time farmers-- going to point of saying the schedule F ( filed with the IRS 'long form') is not valid!!!!:grit: The county is ignoring state regulations about the CAUV usage- even ignoring the lot sizes in relation to financial 'reports' that determine if the CAUV status is legal--- I know of several instances where the county has tried to make the buyer of a piece of property that has carried CAUV 'pay back' the unrealized taxes from the previous owners...

Study your state codes, folks---and know them well-- there is trouble afoot, and the small guy who just wants to take care of himself will be paying the price.... In Ohio, I have found agricultural issues peppered in some of the strangest places of both revised and administrative codes...many things go 'unenforced' but it is wise to know what they are, too. Soil and water regulations are rife with agricultural provisions...

Terry W-- who made SURE she retained the right to complain, by VOTING!!!!

 

[Farmerwilly2]

Hey, Ohio voted for change, so now they'll get it.

 

[Madame]

Makes me glad I don't live in Ohio. Sheesh, what a pain

 

[texican]

Sounds like the Lords are needing more from their free land holders... if someone drove up to my place they wouldn't have to worry about an ag exemption question... the goats would get into the truck if they left the windows down, the geese would attack, the roosters would think they've got new sparring partners..

 

[Mike in Ohio]

Terry W,

Do you have a link to an article or ??

My experience is that drive by "appraisals" are pretty standard from the Auditors office. In Carroll County folks from the auditors office go around every June. A few years back we were late getting the hay off because of ongoing rain (couldn't get 2 sunny days in a row let alone 4) and they sent us a notice. I contacted them and explained. No big deal.

As far as recouping the 3 years difference on the back taxes from the new owners, that too is pretty standard and a long standing practice. Most farmland sale agreements I've seen specify that it is up to the new owners to deal with CAUV. If the land was being farmed and the new owner continues farming it then no big deal.

If the property is less than 10 acres then the Auditors office has the right to ask for documentation of the minimum required production. The amount of production required may vary by county. In Carroll County it is $2,500 annually. That really isn't a very high bar to get over.

The form you are required to file every year provides space to indicate what you are producing. Now I will admit that the auditor office folks were a little nonplussed at our having an apiary. I had to explain to them that the amount of area for the bees wasn't just the hives. For example, this year we planted buckwheat to provide late summer forage for them (with nice success I might add).

I'm just not clear what you are worked up over.

Mike

 

[Oldcountryboy]

Officials are using satelite images for evaluating your property taxes too. Mine was re-evaluated and charged a slightly higher tax based on a wood shed I built on my property. All it consisted of was 6 poles and 2 sheets of plywood.

Apparently they take a image of your property and calculate the square footage of any buildings that exist. Home, barn, well house, chicken coop, wood shed, etc. all of it's calculated whether you list it or not.

 

[Truckinguy]

Try putting a "living roof" on any new or existing buildings, maybe that will fool the satellites. Plant grass or a garden, from the air they might not be able to tell there is a building there.

 

[PhilJohnson]

Wow Ohio sounds pretty strict. My parent's farm in Wisconsin hasn't had cows in 12 years and there are 15 foot pines that overtook most of the pasture and they still fall under the ag property tax. And I never heard of such nonsense of paying "back" taxes for someone's use of the land that didn't agree with the tax category it was in. I paid ag taxes on my 5 acres the first year I lived there. They changed it the next year of coarse but they didn't penalize me because the previous owner hadn't farmed the land in 20 years. I know one thing, I won't be moving to Ohio with their sneaky satellite tax surveillance system.

 

[Mike in Ohio]

Wow Ohio sounds pretty strict. My parent's farm in Wisconsin hasn't had cows in 12 years and there are 15 foot pines that overtook most of the pasture and they still fall under the ag property tax. And I never heard of such nonsense of paying "back" taxes for someone's use of the land that didn't agree with the tax category it was in. I paid ag taxes on my 5 acres the first year I lived there. They changed it the next year of coarse but they didn't penalize me because the previous owner hadn't farmed the land in 20 years. I know one thing, I won't be moving to Ohio with their sneaky satellite tax surveillance system.

Phil, CAUV is not a regular tax catagory for property based on zoning or land type - it is based on use and meeting certain requirements. You have to apply for that status as it is a tax reduction from the regular rates you would otherwise be paying on the land as a non-farmer. The intent is to prevent speculators and developers from parking land and getting the lower tax rate from Current Agricultural Use Valuation (CAUV). I know people who let others farm their land just so they can maintain the CAUV status.

When you sign up for it you agree that when the property stops meeting the requirements you pay the back the difference on the taxes you would have owed for the previous 3 years. If you are truly farming this shouldnot be an onerous requirement.

The intent is to ensure that only land used for farming gets the tax reduction. The tax reduction only applies to land, not improvements such as barns, etc.

This really is not that big of a deal. If you don't want to sign up for it then don't. If you buy a property and it is under CAUV and you don't want to maintain that status then specify in the purchase contract that the previous owner is responsible for paying back CAUV (if they will agree).

Mike

 

[Terry W]

Most of us are okay with the county getting truly 'unfarmed' land back into the higher tax rates-- after all, the 'farmers' have moved on-- ususally by dying off, and the kids just let the land sit. There is a difference within the codes-- less than 10 acres, must have a minimum pf 2500 or 50% of income from the creage-- more than 10 acres, no income 'requirement' need be met. however-- many people who are 'homesteading' out here manage their woodlots-- a valid agricultural activity-- one new neighbor, after getting the CAUV letter, added three cows to his three horses-- making the hayfields even more necessary for the maintenence of 'livestock' Some of us thnk it is kind of funny-- that the long established farmers are getting letters removing the CAUV status (what do haybarns, greenhouses, sheep, cows, poultry, multiple pieces of farm equipment, and half acres plots of one type of vegetable MEAN to these idiot drive by people? the person with a pet mini- horse gets CAUV, but the person makiing a real living from his land doesn't?

oh yeah, a lot of people recently got hit with the ariel photo footprint thing---all kinds of buildings with no permit history-- Ashtabula county is supposedly in a bankrupt situation--but somehow, some of the local townships are getting things done. One neighbor took in the last 10 years of tax returns, showing the income generation from each of her various, diverse activities. Another announced "here's MY permit", and showed the drive by inspector a shotgun.....I look at it this way-- I have an APHIS site ID number-- why have one if I wasn't farming?

yeah, 'we' voted for change--I want that change to be the 'American Dream' though-- not the dream of Party Line politics....

 

[agmantoo]

Here in NC if the property is sold and no longer qualifies the current tax and the past 3 years tax plus 6% interest on the past tax has to be paid, typically by the seller. As executor for an estate for a farm that sold recently the bill was in excess of $51,000. Getting land into a farm use tax deferral catagory has become difficult. Now if we have crop land and tree land they have to each qualify separately. I knew I was going to encounter problems so I put a fence around the perimeter and called it all pasture. That was denied until I explained that cattle need shade during hot weather. It is best to be totally informed prior to seeking the deferral. I had one tax office supervisor so PO'd she refused to talk to me and had an underling to deal with me. I was prepared. When I went to the office, the supervisor told me that the farm did not qualify. Replying, I told her I had a copy of the regulations and that I had back up paper work to prove that I qualified to the letter of the law and I added it was not her position to make the determination but that she was to see that I could substantiate that in fact I met the NC's requirements she went ballistic. I find it rather humorous that now when I go to the tax office and she sees me she goes to her office and shuts the door. Just get your facts together and stand your ground!

 

[Mike in Ohio]

Terri,

Horses are specifically excluded from CAUV substantiation unless your primary business with respect to that property is raising and selling horses.

As far as woodlot management being an agricultural activity, in Ohio forestry management is a different program than CAUV unless the property is being used to produce nuts or some other item besides wood. By itself, having a woodlot on a property would not be sufficient to acquire CAUV status.

It may be that the folks from the Ashtabula County Auditors office are acting like blankety blanks but that is different from what the law actually is and requires.

Mike

 

[brosil]

We haven't had any trouble like that around here.

 

[PhilJohnson]

The intent is to prevent speculators and developers from parking land and getting the lower tax rate from Current Agricultural Use Valuation (CAUV).

Mike

Can't say I have much of a problem with that. But I still think it is wrong for the state to try and get their grubby paws on tax dollars that they weren't missing in the first place by re-evaluation of the history of what the property was being used for. Somehow I doubt if a farmer had been farming land for say 5 years and the property was taxed at the non-ag tax rate that the state woud refund the difference.

 

[MN Gardener]

You can always go to the board of reviews and ask the assessor's office to review you status or just call them directly. They have changed a lot of the laws on farming and tax rates. Of course, the laws are less then specific. My DH is an assessor and there has been a lot of confusion and need for clarification on the new laws.

 

[Mike in Ohio]

Here is the information on CAUV posted by the Carroll County Ohio Auditors office:

http://www.carrollcountyohio.net/auditor/cauv.htm

 

[NorthCountryWd]

As far as woodlot management being an agricultural activity, in Ohio forestry management is a different program than CAUV unless the property is being used to produce nuts or some other item besides wood. By itself, having a woodlot on a property would not be sufficient to acquire CAUV status.

Mike

Harsh.

VT has ag and timber under the same current use program and it's fairly painless to comply. They do inspect to make sure you are compliant, but you'd be lucky if it's once or twice a decade.

 

[Mike in Ohio]

After looking at what is posted on the auditors site it looks like you could put a woodlot in. On the other hand, producing $2,500 from a 10 acre woodlot each year might not be the easiest to show.

Mike