There's nothing
wrong with giving farmers a break on property
taxes on the land they use to produce timber or
crops. But the law should be rewritten to prevent
developers from taking unfair advantage of that
tax break.
Owners of land designated for agricultural use
can qualify for enormous deductions in their
property taxes, sometimes cutting more than 99
percent of a property's taxable value. The law is
designed to encourage owners to continue to farm
despite the allure of developing the property.
To qualify for the tax break, a parcel must
include five acres of trees or 10 acres of crops.
But developers are abusing the rules to reduce
taxes on land they intend to sell or to build on.
For example, the owner of a 5-acre beachfront
lot worth millions might plant trees on the lot,
reducing property taxes from thousands to, in many
cases, less than $100. Many large developers with
multimillion-dollar tracts paid less property tax
last year than the average homeowner, according to
a study by The (Charleston) Post and Courier.
The law allows unconnected, undersized plots to
be taxed under agricultural rates if they are
designated under a "timber management system."
That way, developers can buy up small, valuable
tracts, lump them under a timber management system
and reap the tax benefits.
Make no mistake: The tax break for farmers is
essential to the state's agricultural well-being.
Many farmers could not afford the property taxes
on what they earn selling crops or timber without
the exemption.
But, as critics note, abuse of this tax break
by non-farmers simply means higher taxes for
everyone else. Bob Scott, president of the
Forestry Association, suggests that lawmakers
increase the timber lot size to 10 acres to
eliminate the loophole for smaller lots, a
proposal that seems worth pursuing.
The abuse of this loophole also highlights the
futility of a piecemeal approach to property tax
reform. Lawmakers need to assess the entire tax
structure and address inequities such as this one
before rushing to make wholesale changes in how
property is taxed.
IN SUMMARY |
Developers should not be able to take
advantage of tax break for agricultural
property.
|