ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is a contested case brought by Mary C. Abercrombie as the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to
as "taxpayer") against the Greenville County Assessor (hereinafter referred to as "assessor")
concerning property classification for tax year 1995. The assessor denied the taxpayer's
application for agricultural use classification for property located at 820 McKinney Road,
Simpsonville, South Carolina. The Greenville County Board of Assessment Appeals upheld the
assessor's denial of agricultural use classification.
The taxpayer is seeking a contested case hearing before the Administrative Law Judge Division
pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-60-2540 (Supp. 1995). After notice to the parties, a hearing
was conducted on September 23, 1996. Any issues raised in the proceedings or hearing of this
case but not addressed in this Order are deemed denied. ALJD Rule 29(B).
POSITION OF THE PARTIES
The taxpayer's position is that the property qualifies for agricultural use classification because it is
utilized for farmland and because of deed restrictions the property can only be used for one
residence. The taxpayer also alleges that from 1988 to 1994, the property was split agricultural
and residential for assessment purposes and not for commercial or other usage.
The assessor argues that the acreage fails to meet the agricultural use classification because it
does not meet the minimum acreage for nontimberland under S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-232. The
assessor bases this decision on the fact that the property does not contain ten acres; is not
contiguous with that of another property owner; and no income has been derived from use of the
property for agricultural purposes.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based upon the evidence presented, I make the following findings of fact, taking into
consideration the burden on the parties to establish their respective cases by preponderance of the
evidence and taking into accountability the credibility of the witnesses:
1. This Division has personal and subject matter jurisdiction.
2. Notice of the date, time, place and nature of the hearing was timely given to all parties.
3. The property, purchased by Mary C. Abercrombie in 1989, contains 8.1 acres located at 820
McKinney Road, Simpsonville, South Carolina and is identified on the Greenville County Tax
Map as # TMS 897-0548.01-01-025.11.
4. The deed contains a restriction that for a period of fifteen years from the date of deeding, the
property shall be used only for one single family residence except for the construction of barns,
outbuildings and other buildings which may not be for residential purposes.
5. The taxpayer uses the property as her legal residence and has farmed the property for her own
personal agricultural use growing corn, okra and potatoes. At least 70-75% of these vegetables
were given away to friends and neighbors. Currently five acres of property is fenced and two
horses kept in this area. A barn is located on the property as storage area for equipment used to
maintain the property.
6. The property has been classified as residential and agricultural from 1988 to 1994.
7. The assessor mailed new applications to all persons with property in the county that was
receiving the agricultural use classification for property owners to reapply based upon changes in
the law. After receipt of the application, the assessor determined that the property did not meet
the criteria for agricultural use classification because the property was not ten acres; it is not
contiguous to another tract of the same owner; it did not produce at least $1000 in income; and it
was not owned by the current owner or an immediate family member for ten years.
8. The assessor classified five acres of the property as legal residence and classified the remaining
3.1 acres as non-owner occupied "other" property.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law, the following:
1. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-60-2540 (Supp. 1995) authorizes the South Carolina Administrative Law
Judge Division to hear contested cases pursuant to Chapter 23 of Title 1 of the 1976 Code, as
amended.
2. An agricultural use classification is granted to agricultural real property "actually used for
agricultural purposes." S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-220(d)(Supp. 1995).
3. The General Assembly amended the requirements for agricultural use classification in 1994
effective for tax years beginning after 1994. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-232 (Supp. 1995)
substantially revised the requirements for agricultural use and created separate more stringent
criteria. It states that for property to be classified as agricultural real property, the property must
meet the following requirements:
(2) For tracts not used to grow timber as provided in item (1) of this section, the tract must
be ten acres or more. Nontimberland tracts of less than ten acres which are contiguous to
other such tracts which, when added together, meet the minimum acreage requirements, are
treated as a qualifying tract. For purposes of this item (2) only, contiguous tracts include
tracts with identical owners of record separated by a dedicated highway, street, or road or
separated by any other public way.
(3) (a) Nontimberland tracts not meeting the acreage requirement of item (2) qualify as
agricultural real property if the person making the application required pursuant to Section
12-43-220(d)(3) earned at least one thousand dollars of gross farm income for at least three
of the five taxable year preceding the year of the application. ....
(e) A nontimberland tract that does not meet the acreage or income requirements of this
section to be classified as agricultural real property must nevertheless be classified as
agricultural real property if the current owner or an immediate family member of the current
owner has owned the property for at lest the ten years ending January 1, 1994 and the
property is classified as agricultural real property for property tax year 1994. ...
S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-232 (Supp. 1995).
4. Under the criteria listed above, the property does not meet the requirements for agricultural use
classification. The property does not contain the minimum ten acres, it is not contiguous to other
property owned by taxpayer, and taxpayer (or her immediate family) did not own the property
dating back to January 1, 1984.
5. S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-220 (Supp. 1995) provides for the assessment of property for ad
valorem taxation. Specifically, Section 12-43-220(c) states that the legal residence and not more
than five acres contiguous thereto, when owned and occupied by the owner is taxed on an
assessment equal to four percent of the fair market value of the property. Under Section
12-43-220(e), "all other real property not herein provided for shall be taxed on an assessment
equal to six percent of the fair market value of such property." S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-220
(Supp. 1995).
6. Only five acres contiguous to the taxpayer's legal residence may be assessed at the four percent
ratio. None of the property qualifies for agricultural use and therefore the four percent ratio for
agricultural use is not available to the taxpayer. The remaining 3.1 acres can only be assessed at
six percent.
7. The deed restrictions simply prohibit the subdivision of the property for residential purposes or
any buildings for use as residences. The only other uses available, if not other restricted by zoning
or other recorded restrictions, are agricultural or commercial. In order to receive a special
assessment ratio the property must qualify under one of the provisions of S.C. Code Ann. §
12-43-220 (Supp. 1995), it does not.
ORDER
Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law, it is hereby
ORDERED that the taxpayer's application for use of agricultural use classification for tax year
1995 on property identified as Greenville County Tax Map # 0548.02-01-025.11 is DENIED and
that the property shall subject to the split assessment as 5.0 acres for "legal residence" and the
remaining 3.1 acres as "other".
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
September _____, 1996
Columbia, South Carolina. |