Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20091835.tiffCLERK TO THE BOARD PHONE (970) 336-7215, Ext. 4226 FAX: (970) 352-0242 P. O. BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 COLORADO August 10, 2009 JBS USA LLC FKA SWIFT & COMPANY 1770 PROMONTORY CIR GREELEY, CO 806349039 RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 2009, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO - DENY PETITIONER'S APPEAL AND AFFIRM ASSESSOR'S VALUE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: ACCOUNT #: P0003960 PARCEL #: 080332303001 - BEEF PACKING PLANT GR CP-1 CAPITAL PACK SITUS: 800 N 8 AV GREELEY 80631 Dear Petitioner: On August 5, 2009, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, convened, and acting as the Board of Equalization, pursuant to Section 39-8-101, C.R.S., et.seq., considered your petition of appeal of the County Assessor's valuation of your property described above, for the year 2009. The Board of Equalization found that the evidence presented at the hearing clearly supported the value placed upon your above described property by the County Assessor. Such evidence indicated the value was reasonable, equitable, and derived according to the methodologies, percentages, figures and formulas dictated to the Weld County Assessor by law. The assessment and valuation of the Weld County Assessor was affirmed as follows: ACTUAL VALUE AS DETERMINED BY ASSESSOR ACTUAL VALUE AS SET BY BOARD $27,731,100 $27,731,100 e 2009-1835 IAS0073 Pet (cEin k ) G?� // JBS USA LLC FKA SWIFT & COMPANY - P0003960 Page 2 A denial of a petition, in whole or in part, by the Board of Equalization may be appealed by selecting one of the following three options; however, said appeal must be filed within 30 days of the denial: 1. Board of Assessment Appeals: You have the right to appeal the County Board of Equalization's (CBOE's) decision to the Board of Assessment Appeals (BAA). Such hearing is the final hearing at which testimony, exhibits, or any other evidence may be introduced. If the decision of the BAA is further appealed to the Court of Appeals only the record created at the BAA hearing shall be the basis for the Court's decision. No new evidence can be introduced at the Court of Appeals. (Section 39-8-108(10), C.R.S.) Appeals to the BAA must be made on forms furnished by the BAA, and such appeals should be mailed or delivered within thirty (30) days of denial by the CBOE to: Board of Assessment Appeals 1313 Sherman Street, Room 315 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: 303-866-5880 Fees: A taxpayer representing himself is not charged for the first two appeals to the Board of Assessment Appeals; however, a taxpayer being represented by an agent or an attorney must submit a fee of $101.25 per appeal. OR District Court: You have the right to appeal the CBOE's decision to the District Court of the county wherein your property is located. New testimony, exhibits or any other evidence may be introduced at the District Court hearing. For filing requirements, please contact your attorney or the Clerk of the District Court. Further appeal of the District Court's decision is made to the Court of Appeals for a review of the record. (Section 39-8-108(1), C.R.S.) OR 3. Binding Arbitration: You have the right to submit your case to arbitration. If you choose this option the arbitrator's decision is final and your right to appeal your current valuation ends. (Section 39-8-108.5, C.R.S.) Selecting the Arbitrator: In order to pursue arbitration, you must notify the CBOE of your intent. You and the CBOE select an arbitrator from the official list of qualified people. If you cannot agree on an arbitrator, the District Court of the county in which the property is located will make the selection. Arbitration Hearing Procedure: Arbitration hearings are held within sixty days from the date the arbitrator is selected. Both you and the CBOE are entitled to participate. The hearings are informal. The arbitrator has the authority to issue subpoenas for witnesses, books, records, documents and other evidence. He 2009-1835 AS0073 JBS USA LLC FKA SWIFT & COMPANY - P0003960 Page 3 also has the power to administer oaths, and all questions of law and fact shall be determined by him. The arbitration hearing may be confidential and closed to the public, upon mutual agreement. The arbitrator's written decision must be delivered to both parties personally or by registered mail within ten (10) days of the hearing. Such decision is final and not subject to review. Fees and Expenses: The arbitrator's fees and expenses are agreed upon by you and the OBOE. In the case of residential real property, such fees and expenses cannot exceed $150.00 per case. The arbitrator's fees and expenses, not including counsel fees, are to be paid as provided in the decision. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (970) 336-7215, Extension 4226. Very truly yours, Esther E. Gesick Deputy Clerk to the Board cc: Christopher Woodruff, Assessor DUFF AND PHELPS LLC/BRUCE CARTWRIGHT 950 17TH ST STE 2000 DENVER, CO 80202 2009-1835 AS0073 Weld County CHRISTOPHER M. WOODRUFF COUNTY ASSESSOR BRENDA DONES, DEPUTY ASSESSOR VALUATION REPORT OF PERSONAL PROPERTY FOR County Board of Equalization JBS USA LLC FKA SWIFT & COMPANY PETITIONER Vs. WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE RESPONDENT Schedule Number: P0003960 Log Number: 2548 Date: 8/5/2009 Time: 02:45 PM Board: Board #1 PREPARED BY APPRAISERS NAME Sean McElroy 08/04/09 Signature Date ASSESSOR'S OFFICE STAFF APPRAISER CBOE_PP_010998 Page 1 026°9-a3s- COST APPROACH Location of the subject property is: Business Name Street Address City Beef Packing Plant 800 N 8 AV Greeley NARRATIVE The value on this account was originally derived from an asset listing supplied by the petitioner with their 2009 Personal Property Declaration. The declaration was sent to our office electronically, was reviewed by an appraiser and then was imported into our personal property computer program. The declaration was signed by the owner/agent declaring that the information provided on the declaratior included a full and complete list of property and that no attempt had been made to mislead the Assessor as to it's age, quality, quantity or value. The procedures used for valuing the Personal Property comply with the documented procedures anc tables in the Assessor Reference Library (ARL) published by the State Property Tax Administrator. The State Property Tax Administrator's Assessor Reference Library manuals are binding on county assessors per statute, 39-2-109(1)(e), and case law, Huddleston v. Grand County Bd. of Equaliz., 91 P.2d 15 (Cob. 1996). The actual value of $28,886,562 was determined by classifying the assets reported on the declaration, the year they were purchased and their original cost, and then applying the appropriate tables and factors as mandated by the Colorado Department of Property Taxation. CBOE_PP_01C Pal The Weld County Assessor's Office and JBS Swift have a historically established method for measuring economic obsolescence at the JBS USA Beef Packing Plant. It is based upon the comparison of the total production capacity for our benchmark year vs. actual production for the current year, with the established benchmark year of 2002. This methodology was negotiated in 200 and was applied in 2006, 2007 and 2008 as follows: 2006 42% 2007 37.62% 2008 27% 2009 4% This method established a rate of 4% economic obsolescence for 2009. This 4% was then applied tc the current actual value to establish an actual value with economic obsolescence taken into consideration of $27,731,100. Our office believes that this previously agreed upon way to measure the economic obsolescence is appropriate. We do not consider that a company's profit/loss is an indicator of economic obsolescence on an industry. The Assessor's Reference Library in chapter 5 page 3.13 outlines the causes of economic obsolescence as, adverse economic conditions, passag( of restrictive legislation or loss of material or labor sources. There are too many other factors that ca contribute to a company's profitability that can not be related to the causes of economic obsolescent for an industry. With our current method the causes of economic obsolescence are taken into account. COST APPROACH VALUE $27,731,100 CBOE_PP_O1I Pe MARKET APPROACH Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute the Assessor has considered the Market Approach to value of Personal Property. Due to the insufficient information for the market of personal property, the Weld County Assessor has not utilized the Market Approach. INCOME APPROACH Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute the Assessor has considered the Income Approach to value a Personal Property. Due to the insufficient information for the income on Personal Property, the Wek County Assessor has not utilized the Income Approach. CBOE_PP_O1C Pa CONCLUSION The subject property has been classified as Personal Property for property tax purposes. Personal Property values shall be determined by appropriate consideration of the Cost Approach, Market Approach, and Income Approach to value. {39-1-103)(5)(a) CRS} The Assessor has considered the three approaches to value for the subject property. It is the petitioner's responsibility to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate that the Assessor's value is incorrect. After consideration of the three approaches, it is the Weld County Assessor's request that the value $27,731,100 be affirmed for the tax year 2009. FINAL VALUE $27,731,100 CBOE_PP_O1C Pa REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Christopher M. Woodruff WELD Assessor 1400 N 17th Ave GREELEY, CO 80631 Date of Notice: 7/8/2009 Telephone: (970) 353-3845 Fax: (970) 304-6433 Office Hours: 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM A it, f1..4 k+ �.^v£.5 }.nJY SC 7EDUL" /cqu t b •:r --41' yt,r �' 2Y 1 , F ! ^` (uj�r` `fYE'- Y If; `r5 J �}'Y " ji! .} r P0003960 2009 0600 BEEF PACKING PLANT GR CP-1 CAPITAL PACK SITUS: 800 N 8 AV GREELEY 80631 800 N 8 AV GREELEY, CO 80631 It 9. R id O, Kr ai JBS USA LLC FKA SWIFT & COMPANY 1770 PROMONTORY CIR GREELEY, CO 806349039 PROPERTY FI i ry _P;' CL/ SSIF�CATION rr A.S6.SSPRS ALUA7115t f �6 f 1 t{ ; i Q f2laEVIE,UII{`+ t�4JL V� %L t2 4 Y� t At EYE AFTER ,. a f k _ PERSONAL PROP 28,886,562 27,731,100 1• IOTA $28,886,562 $27,731,100 The Assessor has carefully studied all available information, giving particular attention to the specifics included on your protest. The Assessor's determination of value after review is based on the following: PP07 - Your personal property account has been adjusted for 2009. If you disagree with the Assessor's decision, you have the right to appeal to the County Board of Equalization for further consideration, § 39-8-106(1)(a), C.R.S. The deadline for filing real property appeals is July 15. The deadline for filing personal property appeals is July 20. The Assessor establishes property values. The local taxing authorities (county, school district, city, fire protection, and other special districts) set mill levies. The mill levy requested by each taxing authority is based on a projected budget and the property tax revenue required to adequately fund the services it provides to its taxpayers. The local taxing authorities hold budget hearings in the fall. If you are concerned about mill levies, we recommend that you attend these budget hearings. Please refer to last year's tax bill or ask your Assessor for a listing of the local taxing authorities. Please refer to the reverse side of this notice for additional information. 2009-1835 ;Tri WIDC COLORADO July 27, 2009 JBS USA LLC FKA SWIFT & COMPANY 1770 PROMONTORY CIR GREELEY, CO 806349039 CLERK TO THE BOARD PHONE (970) 356-4000 EXT 4226 FAX: (970) 352-0242 WEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us 915 10TH STREET P.O. BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 Parcel No.: 080332303001 Account No.: P0003960 Dear Petitioner(s): The Weld County Board of Equalization has set a date of August 5, 2009, at or about the hour of 2:45 PM, to hold a hearing on your valuation for assessment. This hearing will be held at the Weld County Centennial Center, First Floor Hearing Room, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. You have a right to attend this hearing and present evidence in support of your petition. The Weld County Assessor or his designee will be present. The Board will make its decision on the basis of the record made at the aforementioned hearing, as well as your petition, so it would be in your interest to have a representative present. If you plan to be represented by an agent or an attorney at your hearing, prior to the hearing you shall provide, in writing to the Clerk to the Board's Office, an authorization for the agent or attorney to represent you. If you do not choose to attend this hearing, a decision will still be made by the Board by the close of business on August 5, 2009, and mailed to you on or before August 12, 2009. Because of the volume of cases before the Board of Equalization, all cases shall be limited to 15 minutes. Also due to volume, cases cannot be rescheduled. It is imperative that you provide evidence to support your position. This may include evidence that similar homes in your area are valued less than yours or you are being assessed on improvements you do not have. Please note: The fact that your valuation has increased cannot be your sole basis of appeal. Without documented evidence as indicated above, the Board will have no choice but to deny your appeal. If you wish to obtain the data supporting the Assessor's valuation of your property, please submit a written request directly to the Assessor's Office by fax (970) 304-6433, or if you have questions, call (970) 353-3845. Upon receipt of your written request, the Assessor will notify you of the estimated cost of providing such information. Payment must be made prior to the Assessor providing such information, at which time the Assessor will make the data available within three (3) working days, subject to any confidentiality requirements. JBS USA LLC FICA SWIFT & COMPANY - P0003960 Page 2 Please advise me if you decide not to keep your appointment as scheduled. If you need any additional information, please call me at your convenience. Very truly yours, BOARD OF EQUALIZATION /),2 Esther E. Gesick Deputy Clerk to the Board cc: Christopher Woodruff, Assessor DUFF AND PHELPS LLC/BRUCE CARTWRIGHT 950 17TH ST STE 2000 DENVER, CO 80202 IxnI &PIILI I'S u.c • 950 I— S1RII I.scut2000 • DINVIR.LT) 802202 . it t 30"i9900I • }'y303'499011 LAUREN THOMAS Vice President TEL 303-749-9024 OR 720-891-3318 l auren.thnmas@duffandphelpj corn DUFF &PHELPS July 20, 2009 Weld County Board of Equalization 950 10th Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Subject: Personal Property Appeal for JBS USA, LLC for Accounts P0003960, P0006428, P0009835, P0015713, P0905210, P2344902 Dear Members of the Board: As duly authorized agent of JBS USA, LLC, Duff & Phelps, LLC hereby submits the following business personal property appeal for accounts P0003960, P0006428, P0009835, P0015713, P0905210, and P2344902. Duff & Phelps, LLC provides the following reasons for the appeal: JBS has been experiencing a significant decline in the profitability of their operations since 2002. Despite their increased utilization for 2008, their net loss per head of cattle was ($12). We believe an economic obsolescence adjustment not less than 30% is warranted for account P0003960. The financials for the lamb operations will be further examined. Duff & Phelps, LLC disagrees with the current Department of Property Tax personal property trend schedules to establish values for JBS USA LLC's accounts and believes adjustments to the trend schedule are necessary to develop appropriate values. The estimates of value for the above listed accounts are attached. If you have any questions regarding this statement, please feel free to contact me at 303-749-9024 or Bruce Cartwright at 303-749-9003. Sincerely, Lauren Thomas, Duff & Phelps Encl. ce President www.duffandphelps.com JBS USA, LLC 2009 Personal Property Appeal Account P0003960 P0006428 P0009835 P0015713 P2344902 P0905210 Description Beef Plant By Products Old HQ Lamb Plant HQ -Promontory Circle New - Miller Bros Exec 2009 NOD 27,731,100 430,428 19,065 2,172, 531 3,107,027 C 71,028 Total 33,531,179 2009 Petitioner's Opinion of Value 14,859,490 308,823 14,174 1,757,937 2,217,918 65,510 19,223,852 Appointment of Agency for Property Tax Matters Duff & Phelps LLC is authorized to represent JBS USA LLC and its subsidiaries on personal property tax matters in Weld County Colorado. Duff & Phelps LLC is authorized to act on our behalf in obtaining and providing information, negotiating, settling and assessing for all personal property matters related to the property owned, possessed, or controlled by the undersigned at the above - referenced address. This agent is delegated full authority to handle all matters relative to assessments and to represent us, with the assistance of legal counsel, if necessary, in the appeal process. This appointment of agency remains in effect for tax years 2007, 2008 and 2009 or until revoked in writing by JBS USA LLC or Duff & Phelps LLC. All correspondence should be directed to the following: NAME: Bruce Cartwright Duff & Phelps LLC ADDRESS: 950 17th Street, Suite 2000 Denver, Colorado 80202 303-749-9003 SIGNED: NAME/TITLE: Cindy Garland, T Director Tax Director DATE EFFECTIVE: cola9loq NOTARIZATION: State of Colorado County of Weld /� 1 The foregoing instrument was duly acknowledged before me by Cl nr�� C r �anC for the uses and purposes therein expressed. U r _ Witness my and Notarial Seal, this a9121 day of June 20 O9 . Notary Public My commission expiresCtp a9 /2O69 RACHELLE DURHAM Notary Public State of Colorado My CommlUlon Expires April 29, 201 3 CERTIFIED MAIL EL6h 't92h T000 OShE 9001. el t0 O W 0 A4 v h 3 kin Ct 60 Lit to' 4 i i et 4 t' . 42 1 I O JBS USA, LLC 2009 Personal Property Appeal Account P0003960 P0006428 P0009835 P0015713 P0905210 P2344902 Description Beef Plant By Products Old HQ Lamb Plant New - Miller Bros Exec. Office HQ -Promontory Circle Total Weld County NOD 2009 Value 27,731,100 430,428 19,065 2,172,531 71,028 3,107,027 D&P 2009 Requested Value 10,613,922 308,823 14,174 1,757,937 65,510 2,217,918 33,531,179 14,978,284 If Co o O N 1,302,243 Co Vwr D a CD I 1,635,446,558 I (16,271,732)1 wN N 2007 976,042 1,352,871,876 I 1,180,461,457 aO O Ur up up cs 0 O V O N O a CO 1 1,076,604,1131 1 923,434,478 0)) (O CD v NE V W 2005 I r M 0) 0) 1,268,422,050 r r N N r r r (15,735,908)1 N r 2004 I a V o N r 1,531,143,751 I 1,352,825,004 o O ao W r 1,056 ._. 2003 I M N to N r 1,302,832,228 1,116,808,012 Co CO M N M (O Co M 2002 I O R o M r W t O O) O Co M 1,172,834,022 N 0) O N CO N r CoN N Fiscal Year Total Head Net Sales Material Costs' Gross Margin) Material Cost Per Head Gross Margin Per Head 0) C1) a Increase in Material Cost Per head, 2003 to 2009 Economic Obsolescence Factors Previously Determined r N O O N M N O) r V V V O r V M V O N Q) r O O O) CO CO N =O V CO COrO M N N O) CO O) M 0 S--- H C r CO O N O) O N r w O O M mN MOM CO r A O) M ao O c0 U MOWVMO N N N M r W M N Co CO t+) N v Co Co • N r M_. c.. 0 Q) O o e' o e n - U N N N ro r C N V M N O w O C C) N o 751 U N w a O M V u) Co r Co 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ▪ 0 0 0 0 0 0 • N N N N N N N C) C) ✓ C O C E 1-N(0.1100r-0 V )O t0 r CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - y}y}}j} C LL LLLL LL LL LL LL u C C) C lL 2 U N U, Q O z Q F Z W U, 0 J Wet N ~ Q Z I- O Z 0 • Z CLQ J 5 Q W Z re 0 N 0' JQ W = u. O 6 W co U, a o) m M a• y W a% H U• te O� LL H Z W Q I- - ce m a U, U) F Z W U 0 0 U, 2 H JBS USA LLC 2008 Income Summary and Comparison Capacity Actual Headcount Net Sales Material Costs Meat Margin Storage Expenses Freight Expenses Packaging Costs Variable Cost Hourly Labor Supplies Internal Transportation Total Variable Cost Fixed Cost Salary Labor Contract Services Utilities Repair and Maintenance Hourly Insurance Taxes (Other than income) Lease and Rent Expense Insurance, Employee Relations, Travel other Other Expenses Total Fixed Cost Gross Margin Depreciation Expense Net Operating Income Before Tax Income Taxes NOI After Tar Total PP&E Return on PP&E Gross Margin/Gross Sales NOIAT/Grass Sales Actual Value - Personal Property D&P Actual Value with Trend & Depreciation Corrections Requested Value - Personal Property Greeley, CO Per Head Grand Island, NE Per Head Parent Company 1,715,500 1,898,000 1,302,243 1,448,167 1,891,541,643 1,453 2,115,474,710 1,461 8,928,224,764 1,635,446,558 1,256 1,802,083,702 1,244 7,260,914,236 256.095, 085 197 313.391, 008 216 1, 667, 310, 528 4,147,916 3 3,948,066 3 62,238,345 48 66,296,982 46 23,398,279 18 23,779,073 16 89,802,029 69 84,078,808 58 9,342,172 7 7,907,276 5 1,255,287 1 1,190,583 1 100.399,488 77 93,176,667 64 29,484,967 23 26,679,355 18 16,326,265 13 15,462,761 11 15,749,561 12 20,198,557 14 10,665,801 8 10,919,457 8 5,367,784 4 4,305,893 3 1,906,202 I 1,110,602 1 1,238,642 I 4,335,173 3 2,447,570 2 3,869,185 3 (1,004,002) (I) (1,154,027) (I) 82,18Z790 63 85.726, 956 59 (16,271,732) (12) 40,463,264 28 700.564,996 (8,085,913) (6) (5,192,635) (4) (130,549,257) 570,015,738 (24,357,645) (19) 35,270,629 24 9,377,693 7 (13.579,192) (9) (31,989,219) (14,979,952) (12) 21,691,437 15 538,026,519 30, 702, 429 -48.79% -0.86% -0.79% NA NA 1.91% 1.03% /3,550,865,045 3.97% 7.85% 6.03% 27, 731,100 21,227,843 10,613.922 50% Obsolescence Factor applied to D&P Value JBS USA LLC Challenge of DPT Schedules Age 1995 14 1996 13 1997 12 1998 11 1999 10 2000 9 2001 8 2002 7 2003 6 2004 5 2005 4 2006 3 2007 2 2008 1 Trend Index CPI -U Denver, DPT Cost Boulder, Index 2 Greeley 1.41 1.39 1.37 1.36 1.36 1.33 1.32 1.31 1.29 1.25 1.17 1.12 1.07 1.00 1.42 1.37 1.33 1.30 1.26 1.21 1.16 1.14 1.12 1.12 1.10 1.06 1.04 1.00 Depreciation Current DPT Proposed % % Good Good (7% (12.5% Return) Return) 15 19 22 26 33 39 45 52 59 66 73 80 87 94 15 24 27 32 40 46 52 59 66 72 79 84 90 95 y 3.15 If, after physically inspecting the property, the assessor determines that the condition of the subject property is worse than average, an adjustment reducing the percent good applied to the property is made to account for this additional physical obsolescence. If the assessor determines that the condition of the subject property is better than average, an adjustment increasing the percent good applied to the property is made to account for this additional physical utility. The specific adjustment is based upon evidence from the market and should be documented on the appraisal record. Measure Curable Depreciation & Functional Obsolescence Curable physical depreciation and curable functional obsolescence are generally measured using the cost to cure method, i.e. the cost of curing or repairing the additional depreciation or obsolescence. Keep in mind that curable depreciation and obsolescence must be economically practical to cure. The cost to cure the deficiency is subtracted from the RCNLD estimate as a loss in addition to incurable physical depreciation. Measure Incurable Functional and Economic Obsolescence Incurable functional and economic obsolescence are estimated by either capitalizing the loss of income due to whatever causes exist at the time of the appraisal or by estimating that loss using direct sales comparison in the market. The analysis and verification of increased operating costs, reduced economic income, or reduction in market value of a property provide the assessor with indicators that depreciation or obsolescence, over and above that published in age -life depreciation tables, may be warranted. The court ruled in Colorado & Utah Coal Co. v. Rorex, 149 Colo. 502, 369 P.2d 796 (1962), that if economic obsolescence exists, it must be acknowledged and deducted. Measuring Overall Depreciation Through Capitalization of Loss: The assessor, in some cases, may be able to estimate the typical net income producing capabilities of the personal property being appraised. Then the actual diminished net income, from all causes of depreciation, is measured. This difference in net income is capitalized using an overall capitalization rate (OAR), if possible. Even if the capitalization rate is developed using the band of investment or summation techniques as described in published appraisal texts and in ARL Volume 3, LAND VALUATION MANUAL, Chapter 4, Valuation of Vacant Land Present Worth, it must include return of investment, return on investment, and an effective tax rate. The resulting capitalized value of the income loss from all causes of depreciation is subtracted from the estimate of the capitalized value of the income determined for a comparable property when new. This approach can only be applied when income can accurately be attributed to a single piece of equipment, as with a mobile hot dog stand. When income must be allocated to various pieces of equipment, this approach loses credibility and generally is not appropriate. 15-AS-DPT ARL VOL 5 2-89 Rev 1-07 C 3.4 APPLICATION OF THE APPROACHES In §§ 39-1-103(5) and 104(12.3)(a)(I), C.R.S., the assessor is required to consider the cost, sales comparison (market), and income approaches to appraisal when determining the actual value of personal property. For Colorado personal property assessment purposes, the actual value is the value in use, as installed. Colorado statutes require that personal property be valued inclusive of all costs incurred in acquisition and installation of the property. The costs of acquisition, installation, sales/use tax, and freight to the point of use must be considered in the personal property valuation. The inclusion of these costs requires that personal property be valued in use. Therefore, the actual value of personal property is based on its value in use. The most current valuation information available must be gathered and analyzed. It is Division policy that sales comparison (market) and income information used to determine the current actual value of all types of personal property should be gathered and analyzed from the twelve month period immediately preceding the current assessment date, i.e. the prior calendar year. Analysis of data from this period insures that adequate current market and income information is used in the valuation of personal property. Assessors must document the physical condition of personal property as of the assessment date. Assessors also must consider current economic conditions when appraising personal property and must document the reasons for functional and economic obsolescence as of the assessment date. COST APPROACH The cost approach is based upon the principle that the value of a property equals the cost of acquiring an equally desirable substitute property. It is essentially an estimate of the cost of replacing the subject property with a new property that is equivalent in function and utility. However, the subject property is usually worth less than its cost of replacement because of depreciation. Depreciation can be defined, in simple terms, as the loss in value due to any and all causes. However, cost tables only reflect depreciation due to ordinary use of the equipment and some functional obsolescence, and do not reflect depreciation due to extraordinary functional or any economic obsolescence which must be separately estimated. Refer to Calculate Depreciation (Percent Good) later in this chapter. Colorado statutes provide that the cost approach shall establish the maximum value of personal property when the owner of the property has timely filed a declaration which contains full and complete disclosure of all costs incurred in the acquisition and installation of the property as required by § 39-1-103(13)(a), C.R.S. As paraphrased from § 39-1-103(I3)(c), C.R.S., the assessor must consider the cost approach in good faith and shall not deny its use except for just cause that the owner has not made full and complete disclosure, or has not filed a declaration by the statutory deadline. Also, an assessor who wrongly denies the use of the cost approach can be held personally liable for all costs incurred by the taxpayer in protesting an assessment based on such denial. 15-AS-DPT ARL VOL 5 2-89 Rev 1-07 3.11 • Marshall and Swift Publication Co. P.O. Box 26307 RCN Factors Los Angeles, CA 90026 • R.S. Means Company, Inc. 100 Construction Plaza RCN For Specific Equipment Kingston, MA 02364 Many of the companies charge a fee for the information contained in replacement cost manuals. However, payment of the fees usually entitles the purchaser to all updates or factors used in the manual. The manuals provide a valuable crosscheck to estimates of RCN. Do not factor the prices listed in the replacement cost manuals using the cost trending factors found in Chapter 4, Personal Property Tables. Trending factors are furnished with the replacement cost manual by the publisher in order to trend manual RCN's to the current assessment date. Since these trending factors are specifically intended for use with the particular manual do not apply these factors to other manuals or to original costs declared by the taxpayer. Determine Accrued Depreciation: Accrued depreciation is the difference between the current replacement cost new and the present value of the equipment as of the date of the appraisal. Depreciation may be defined as follows. Depreciation is "Loss in value of an object, relative to its replacement cost, reproduction cost, or original cost, whatever the cause of the loss in value..." according to Property Appraisal and Assessment Administration, IAAO, 1990, page 641. The causes of accrued depreciation are divided into three categories: 1. Physical Depreciation (deterioration) a. Wear and tear from use or from the elements b. Negligent care or inadequate maintenance c. Damage from moisture, breakage, or fire 2. Functional Obsolescence a. Poor plan, design, or style b. Mechanical inadequacy or superadequacy c. Functional inadequacy or superadequacy due to size, style, age d. Technological innovation e. Changes in manufacturing techniques f Changes in consumer tastes 3. Economic Obsolescence a. Adverse economic conditions b. Passage of restrictive legislation c. Loss of material or labor sources Physical depreciation and functional obsolescence relate to deficiencies within the property itself. Deficiencies may be classified as either curable or incurable. The deficiencies are curable if the cost to repair, replace, or correct them is economically feasible. This cost to cure is economically feasible if the cost is equal to or less than the additional income which would be generated by the property after the deficiencies have been cured. The deficiencies are incurable if they are physically or economically impractical to repair, replace, or correct. 15-AS-DPT ARL VOL 5 2-89 Rev 1-07 2- 3.12 Economic obsolescence is due to negative forces outside the property. This type of depreciation is seldom curable and is generally classified as incurable. Losses in value due to functional or economic causes are not related to the actual age of the property, but rather to changing market forces that affect the property. Physical depreciation is related more to its economic life, i.e. its full life assuming normal maintenance, rather than the actual physical age of the equipment. Therefore accrued depreciation is based upon economic life rather than physical life. Depreciation, as used in appraisal, differs from depreciation as used in accounting. Accountants are interested in income tax deduction justification or allocation of the investment made in the personal property to various income producing activities (sometimes referred to as profit centers). In contrast, the assessor attempts to estimate the actual value of the personal property as of the date of the appraisal. The assessor must consider and document all elements of physical depreciation and functional and economic obsolescence as of January 1 each year before placing a value on personal property. Measure Incurable Physical Depreciation: Physical depreciation which is due to ordinary use of the property is incurable because it is economically impractical to bring the property to its original condition when new each year. In order to measure incurable physical depreciation, the assessor determines the total economic life, the effective age, the remaining economic life, and the appropriate depreciation amount to apply to the subject property. Remaining economic life is the number of years remaining in the economic life of the personal property as of the date of appraisal. To make a supportable estimate of incurable physical depreciation, the assessor first determines the correct total economic life of the equipment being appraised. Total economic life is the total period of time over which it is anticipated that equipment can be profitably used. It is described as the sum of the effective age and the remaining economic life. Total economic life is usually less than the physical life of the property. The Economic Life Estimates in Chapter 4, Personal Property Tables, are provided to assist in the estimation of total economic life. Analysis of field data may indicate that the original estimate of economic life should be revised. The economic lives in this manual are generally accurate but there may be exceptions. The estimate of economic life of the property must be defensible, reasonable, and supported by documented evidence. The following are characteristics of equipment that have long, average, and short term economic lives. They are provided as descriptions of the economic lives found in Chapter 4, Personal Property Tables. 15-AS-DPT ARL VOL 5 2-89 Rev 1-07 8 3.14 Determine Remaining Economic Life Remaining economic life expresses the period of time remaining over which the subject property will provide a net return to the owner. In other words, it is the period of time from the date of the appraisal to the time when the property only has salvage value or is scrapped. Remaining economic life is calculated by subtracting the effective age from the total economic life estimate. Calculate Incurable Physical Depreciation to Arrive at % Good The amount of incurable physical depreciation is calculated using the percent good table found in Chapter 4, Personal PropertyTables. The percentage allowed for incurable physical depreciation plus the percent good equals 100%. The percent good table measures the remaining value of property at given points in time during the total economic life of the property. The table found in Chapter 4, Personal Property Tables, generally measures loss in value attributable to typical physical depreciation, and functional/technological obsolescence. The table is not reliable in estimating losses in value due to atypical or extraordinary physical or functional/technological obsolescence or any economic obsolescence that may exist. Measurements of extraordinary functional loss in value or any economic loss in value are made separately, frequently using the income or sales comparison (market) approaches to value. The percent good table is based upon composites derived from the experience of industries and studies by governmental agencies. The table is based on economic life and applies to equipment in average working condition for its effective age. The equipment percent good table is designed to assist the assessor in estimating replacement cost new less normal depreciation (RCNLD). The column headings represent the typical economic life expectancy of the equipment under consideration. Each column shows the normal or typical percent good factor for each year of effective age of the equipment. The procedure for using the percent good table is as follows: 1. Estimate total economic life. 2. Estimate effective age. 3. Multiply RCN by the percent good listed in the table that corresponds to the effective age of the personal property and its total economic life. 15 -AS -OPT ARL VOL 5 2-89 Rev 1-07 Hello