The Oklahoma Farm Bureau is backing an Amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution that would reduce the cap on annual valuation increases in the state from 5% to 4% for many properties, and from 3% to 1.75% for homesteads and agricultural property.
According to Oklahoma Farm Bureau, if the amendment identified as SQ 847 passes, it “would change the Oklahoma Constitution by reducing the cap on the maximum annual valuation increase for real property from 5% to 4%. However, homesteads and agricultural property annual increases would have their cap reduced from 3% to 1.75%. SQ 847 would also change the property tax yearly increase maximums for Oklahomans ages 65 and older to a sliding scale based on income. The result of which is that some Oklahomans age 65 or older could potentially see a property tax increase freeze at the lowest income level with a sliding scale of tax increase caps based on income levels.
“OKFB supports SQ 847 because it would further reduce the amount that property taxes could be increased each year on agricultural land,” OKFB said on its site. “Property tax increases affect farmers and ranchers directly because taxes must be paid regardless if an agricultural producer earns any money from that land. Factors like drought, input costs, fluctuating commodity and livestock prices and more can mean that farmers and ranchers could actually lose money on a given piece of land in a year while property taxes on that land continue to steadily climb.”
The measure is similar to constitutional amendments proposed in the Kansas Legislature for several years — which the Kansas Farm Bureau opposed — and which, ultimately, failed.
In written testimony before the Kansas Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee John Donley, of KFB, said the proposed amendment would shift the burden rather than reduce it.
“While we applaud the intent of this constitutional amendment, we must oppose this proposal because it is a property tax shift, not a broad-based reduction,” he wrote. “KFB is supportive of a broad-based reduction in the statewide mill levy.”
KFB argued that an assessment limit would shift the burden from residential property to agricultural property.
Oklahoma Farm Bureau members saved millions
Dave Trabert, CEO of the Kansas Policy Institute — which owns The Sentinel — noted in an editorial on the KPI website that it hasn’t happened.
“Perhaps the strongest objection to an assessment limit over the last two years came from the Kansas Farm Bureau, which was concerned that a limit ‘could potentially reduce property taxes for certain classes of property on certain years when the appraised value of that property exceeds 3%’ and prompt a shift in the tax burden,” Trabert wrote. “Our calculations indicated that agriculture would greatly benefit from a 3% limit, and newly acquired data from the Oklahoma Tax Commission show significant benefits for farmers in the Sooner State.”
Since 2012, Oklahoma has had a 3% assessment limit on primary residences and agricultural land, and a 5% limit for other real estate. Agricultural improvements (structures built on ag land other than residences) are not subject to the assessment limit, just ag land. The same is true for commercial improvements.
The most recent (2024) Oklahoma data show just a 9% increase for taxable assessed ag land, compared to an 89% increase in Kansas. As a result, property taxes on Kansas ag land jumped 91%, but only 17% in Oklahoma.
Ag land assessed values in Oklahoma cannot increase more than 3% each year, whereas there is no limit in Kansas. The rolling average use value (as opposed to market value) leads to extended periods of spiking and declining values.
Trabert also — spoke in favor of the proposal during the hearing in the Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee in January..
“Statewide, 75% of voters support an assessment limit, while only 13% oppose it,” Trabert said in written testimony. “There is robust support across all geographic areas of the state and all self-identified political viewpoints. Voter support isn’t just strong — it is skyrocketing.”
According to Trabert, homeowners in 52 of the state’s 105 counties have been hit with property tax increases above the 26% state average because local officials took advantage of valuation spikes.
Eric Estes, of the Kansas Deere Dealers Association, said in January he was surprised by opposition from the Kansas Farm Bureau.
“I’m not exactly sure why they would take a stance to not support something that’s good for Ag,” Estes said at the time. “It will help our agriculture and our farms and our cattle producers. So I can’t speak as to why they would be opposed to that. I would like to hear if there’s something better, right? If there’s a better idea, we’d sure love to hear it. But right now, this cap is sure working, and other states have implemented it.”
