24 CIRCULAR S99, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



tual consent of the State Board of Forestry and the owner but fails to 

 provide for withdrawal by the owner in the absence of a contract. 

 In Washington land may be declassified upon the. petition of 25 tax- 

 payers in the county alleging that the classified lands are more valuable 

 for some other purpose. In practice any owner with 25 taxpaying 

 friends can take advantage of this provision to withdraw his land. 



Declassification by State or local government. — The laws of all the 

 yield-tax States except Mississippi make some provision for the re- 

 moval of lands from the provisions of the law by public action. Even 

 in Xew Hampshire where there is no classification procedure the law 

 provides for the taxing under the general property tax of mature 

 timber suitable for harvest if the owner holds such mature timber 

 indefinitely with no intention of cutting. 



Failure of the owner to comply with the provisions of the law or 

 contract regarding such matters as protection, grazing, and devotion 

 to forestry purposes is a basis for declassification in all the other 

 States. Improper classification or fraud or deception in the applica- 

 tion are added bases for declassification in Idaho, Minnesota, and 

 Oregon. The discovery that classified land is more valuable for pur- 

 poses other than forestry is grounds for declassification action in 

 Idaho. Massachusetts, and Washington. In Xew York the failure of 

 an owner to reduce the volume of his stand if it exceeds 40 M board 

 feet of merchantable softwoods or 20 of hardwoods is a basis for de- 

 classification. The purpose of this provision is similar to that in the 

 Xew Hampshire law — to prevent the avoidance of yield-tax payments 

 on financially mature timber. 



Provisions for declassification by public action are needed to pro- 

 tect the public interest. Even though adequate inspections can be 

 made at the time of application to prevent the entry of ineligible 

 lands a procedure is needed to exclude lands that subsequently are 

 not treated in accordance with standards of good forestry. Lands 

 not protected from fire, lands destructively grazed, or lands used for 

 any purpose not consistent with forestry will not yield the timber 

 crops or the tax on harvests needed to compensate for the loss of 

 timber property taxes. 



Declassification taxes. — As a general rule a tax is imposed whenever 

 classified land is declassified, regardless of the reason for declassifica- 

 tion. Three exceptions are the withdrawal of land in Michigan be- 

 cause of any change in the law which would materially increase the 

 burden on theowner ; the removal of land from classification in Wash- 

 ington on petition of 25 taxpayers because the land is more valuable 

 for other purposes ; and the expiration of contracts in Missouri. No 

 tax is imposed in these situations. 



The nature of the tax depends in part on the reason for declassifica- 

 tion. If the reason is withdrawal by the owner or expiration of the 

 contract the general practice is to assess the yield tax against the value 

 of standing merchantable timber at the time classification is ended. 

 This is the provision in the laws of Alabama, Idaho, Michigan, Minne- 

 sota, and Xew York. Michigan also assesses a tax of 3 cents an acre 

 for each year the land was classified, but not for more than 20 years. 

 Louisiana, in a rather vague provision, apparently continues to assess 

 the yield tax for a period of 50 years following the making of the 

 contract. In Missouri and Wisconsin the tax on voluntary withdrawal 



