Murphy’s Law 2024 #11 | Tax Committee

A familiar bill the last few sessions has been about agricultural property either within a city boundary and/or an Ag property which has become surrounded by development. There are those who have asked why some political subs handle the taxation of these types of properties differently, with some judging them to be commercial and others agricultural.

The topic was tackled at a recent Interim Taxation Committee hearing. Pembina County is usually in the forefront of this issue, and Tarin Riley testified that she represents the interested parties from that county. She also praised the League of Cities testimony which came before her and repeated the crux of the problem as she sees it which is the discretion which comes into the two main questions that assessors ask when deciding; One, Is it Agricultural Property? Two, Is it being used as part of a larger farm plant? She testified that the definition of Agricultural Property as well as the definition of raising those crops is open to interpretation. And therein lays the problem. Both Williams and Cass Counties testified in the last meeting that they could see where local assessors have hardship deciding because those definitions are open to interpretation. She is looking for definition of when raising agricultural crops begins, when it ends and if storage is part of that process. For two sessions and all of this interim she mentioned that they have asked for clarification and that they still need a solution. The next meeting will tell if the committee brings forth a bill to the next legislative session.

The next topic saw the committee take testimony on their task of studying Economic Development Tax Incentive Exemptions. They heard from ADM, PetroServe USA, our own Nancy Johnson of the NDSGA, Northern Canola Growers testifying in favor of retaining the biodiesel tax credits discussed during the hearing. This committee has one more regular meeting this interim.