NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
Romero |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
|
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Land Conservation Incentives Act |
SB |
581/aSCORC |
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Neel |
|||||
REVENUE
Estimated Revenue |
Subsequent Years Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
(Insignificant) |
($100.0) |
Recurring |
General
Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
Relates to:
HB 747, Land
Conservation Incentives Act
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC files
Responses
Received From
Taxation
and Revenue Department (TRD)
Energy,
Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD)
Attorney
General’s Office (AG)
State
Land Office (SLO)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of SCONC Amendment
The Senate Conservation Committee Amendment reduces the allowable credit from the “fair market value” to 50 percent of the fair market value of land or interest in land that is conveyed for the purpose of open space. Additionally, the amendment stipulates that only one credit can be claimed per taxable year.
The fiscal impact has been reduced
proportionally with the reduction in the tax credit.
Synopsis
of Original Bill
Senate Bill
581 enacts the
Significant
Issues
The program will leverage public and private resources and will stretch limited funds available for land conservation activities. Local governments with open space protection programs will benefit directly by being able to offer property owners with an economic and land use choice by making it more feasible financially for a landowner to conserve land rather than sell it for development. Owners of farms and ranches will also benefit in their efforts to maintain family agricultural businesses.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
TRD notes the following assumptions in
determining the fiscal impact:
TRD does not have detailed information on land
donations. However, the potential
impacts of the proposal could be significant.
The Nature Conservancy--one of the organizations that
would be eligible for donations under the proposal--reports receiving $80
million in land donations nationwide in 2001. The potential for significant donations is
increased by the fact that the proposed credits are in addition to a deduction
from federal taxable income for the value of the donation. The combined value of the federal tax
deduction and the credit could exceed the value of the land.
An average of 56 taxpayers paid in excess of $100,000 in
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
The LCIA will require the periodic convening of the committee established in the Natural Lands Protection Act (NLPA) in order to review applications for tax credits authorized by the act.
The Forestry Division has program management responsibilities for the Forest Legacy Program. This federally funded program affords landowners the opportunity to sell development rights for conservation purposes. There may be opportunities to link the Forest Legacy Program and LCIA for its tax provisions.
According to EMNRD, the fiscal impacts associated with the administration of the program are estimated to be $24,000/year beginning in FY 05. Impacts would include approximately 25% of one FTE (estimated @ $20,000/year) to coordinate the program and the per diem associated with meetings of the seven-member committee established under the Natural Lands Protection Act (NMSA 1978, Section 75-5-4 A.) estimated to be $4,000/year based upon a quarterly meeting schedule. If NLPA acquisitions were under consideration, the meetings would serve a dual purpose and the fiscal impact would be shared between the two programs.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
Ten other states, including
SN/prr