11/7/2023 0 Comments Iowa hobby farm for saleIn this case, the previous two property tax assessments classified the plaintiff’s property as residential. With limited exceptions, a property can only receive one classification. On review, the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision, ruling that the land was properly classified as residential. Assessors may not classify property according to its highest and best use, but must classify the property according to its present use. However, agricultural land does not include residential buildings with a primary use of human habitation. Agricultural purpose includes growing crops and fruit trees, and raising livestock for profit. This is known as the continuity of use presumption.Īgricultural real estate is defined as land and buildings which are used in good faith primarily for agricultural purposes. Once the classification of a property has been adjudicated, there is a presumption the classification is unchanged for four subsequent assessment years unless another adjudication finds there is a change in use of the property. The classification is to be determined by the property’s primary use. To determine the amount of property taxes owed, the county assessor will determine the classification of a property. The district court found the plaintiff to be “a hobby farmer” and the proper classification to be residential. The Court of Appeals affirmed a prior appeal of the taxpayer’s 2015 assessment in August of 2019.Īt trial, the county assessor testified that while agricultural activities did take place on the property, this was not the primary use. The board denied the petition and the plaintiff appealed directly to the district court. For a third time, the plaintiff petitioned the county board of review claiming the county assessor misclassified the land as residential rather than agricultural. The plaintiff appealed tax assessments for the years 2013, 2015, and-the assessment at issue-2017. One year, he did not grow any crops due to weather conditions. Beginning in 2009, he grew various crops including hay, corn, and pumpkins. The plaintiff used two acres of the land as the homestead, left about five acres of a slough undeveloped, and used 3.6 acres as cropland. The plaintiff in this case purchased 10.2 acres in 2008. The court found the primary use of the property was not agricultural and the property owner did not have a genuine intention to profit. On April 29, 2020, the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s ruling finding a classification of property to be residential rather than agricultural.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |