Wash. Admin. Code § 458-50-180 - Appraisal practices relating to valuing intangible personal property
(1)
Unit
valuation. Unit valuation is a method of determining the market value of
a company, business, or property as a whole without reference to individual
parts or components. For example, a railroad company may have many miles of
track, or a pipeline company may have many miles of pipe, but if the track or
the pipe is not connected in a useful and interdependent way to the rest of the
company's system as a whole, the track or the pipe have considerably less
value. However, when all the interdependent assets of a company are working
together and functioning synergistically as a unit, the value of the company as
a whole is independent of the value of the component parts. Similarly, the roof
or the walls of a house may have value independently of the structure as a
whole, but the market value of the house, for purposes of taxation, is
determined as a unit. Market value is the value of the unit as a whole, not a
summation of fractional appraisals of the component parts. The unit value may
have enhanced taxable value above, taxable value equal to, or taxable value
lower than what the sum of the value of the component parts may indicate. The
department is specifically authorized to take into consideration, among other
things, "the value of the whole system as a unit," when valuing companies with
operating property in more than one county or more than one state.
(RCW
84.12.300; see
alsoRCW 84.16.050.)
(2)
Situs, allocation, and
apportionment. Property taxes may only be levied upon property having
situs in this state, in other words, upon property located in this state. The
process of dividing up the unit value of a company among the states where it
has a presence is called allocation. The process of dividing up the allocated
state value among the taxing jurisdictions within a state is called
apportionment. Once the taxable value, meaning the total value of a company's
operating property in this state less the exempt value, has been determined,
the taxable value is apportioned as required by law.
(3)
Valuation of exempt intangible
personal property. Assessing officials may use one of two methods, as
appropriate, to determine the value of intangible personal property that is
exempted from a company's unit value. The first method is the method by which
the true and fair value of the exempt intangible personal property is deducted
from the true and fair value of the operating property at the system level to
arrive at taxable value at the system or entity level. The second method is the
method by which the true and fair value of exempt intangible personal property
is excluded from the value of the operating property at the system level by
using a valuation model that approximates the value of the nonexempt assets
only. These two methods are explained in more detail as follows.
(a) The first method is a two-step process
that involves valuing the entire company operation, the unit, as the first
step, using any or a combination of the three traditional approaches to value.
Then the exempt property is separately identified, valued, and deducted from
the unit value. In valuing the exempt property, assessing officials use
generally accepted appraisal practices, including sales of similar intangible
personal property, capitalization rates obtained through those sales, or by
identifying cash flows attributable to each intangible personal property asset.
When using this method, the value resulting from deducting the exempt value of
intangible personal property from the entire company value, is the taxable
value at the system or entity level. From that value, the proper value must
then be allocated to this state and apportioned to the local taxing
jurisdictions by law.
(b) The
second method involves an appraisal process using an appraisal model that
intrinsically approximates the exclusion of exempt intangible value. This
process assumes the existence of intangible personal property in the overall
value of the company being valued, but does not specifically identify or value
individual intangible personal property assets. Although the model may not
actually exclude the value of exempt intangible personal property, it simulates
the effect of exempting intangible personal property by producing a lower
assessed value equivalent to the exclusion of exempt intangible
property.
(4)
Unit
value at the county level. When a business operates in more than one
location within a county, but is physically, economically, and functionally
integrated, it may also be valued by the assessor as a unit. However,
properties that share a name, for example, but are independently operated, such
as bank branches, retail outlets, radio stations, or hotels or motels that are
part of a chain, should generally be valued as stand-alone enterprises, and not
as physically, economically, and functionally integrated units. An assessor
should consider the unit being assessed to be the same unit a typical purchaser
would consider in an openly traded market. If the property being assessed would
typically be purchased as a stand-alone and independent operation without
reference to a larger entity, then that is how it should be assessed. If the
property being assessed would typically be included in the purchase of a larger
entity, then the assessor should consider the influence on value that being
included within the larger unit would have on the property being
assessed.
Notes
Statutory Authority: RCW 84.08.010, 84.08.070, and 84.36.865. 06-24-043, § 458-50-180, filed 11/30/06, effective 12/31/06.
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.