Equine advocates ask Senate Finance to narrow farm‑building tax treatment to professional operations

Mindy Henstamp, co‑founder and co‑director of the Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group, told the Senate Committee on Finance on May 19 that lawmakers should narrow bill 942 so that barn and stable structures on professional horse farms receive the same farm‑building treatment as other agricultural operations.

Henstamp asked the committee to limit eligibility to farms with at least 25 acres where 50% or more of household income is derived from equine agricultural activities. She said that standard is intentionally high and would focus relief on “working professional operations,” not hobby farms.

The witness described the group’s data: surveys sent to nearly 200 professional operations produced 62 responses; 22 reported meeting the proposed 25‑acre and 50% income criteria. Henstamp reported an average building‑related tax liability of $5,634 per farm from the sample she reviewed and used that figure to estimate aggregate impacts of roughly $563,000 if 100 farms qualified, and about $1.13 million if 200 qualified. Henstamp acknowledged those figures are estimates because tax cards do not always separate farm buildings from other structures.

“We support narrowing that language to professional equine farms on 25 or more acres and a 50% income standard,” Henstamp said, adding that the narrower scope would be “an investment in Vermont, particularly rural Vermont,” that preserves working land and local economic activity.

Committee members asked how current‑use works in practice. Witnesses and staff explained that land meeting the acreage threshold is assessed at a current‑use value (reducing land tax), while buildings on that land are typically taxed separately at their assessed value; the proposal would treat qualifying equine farm buildings the same way some other farm buildings are treated today. Members also clarified that the two‑acre homestead exclusion reduces the acreage counted toward current use and that equine farms often rely on diversified income streams (boarding, lessons, training, breeding) to meet a 50% income test.

A Joint Fiscal Office representative told the committee that JFO needs draft statutory language and parameters to prepare an accurate fiscal analysis; without explicit language, the office must make assumptions that could materially change budget estimates.

Heidi Cray, also a co‑founder of the Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group, told the committee the industry supports narrowing the bill and highlighted tourism and event income tied to equine activities, saying the change would help entrepreneurs keep farms operational and land in agriculture.

The committee did not take a final vote on bill 942 on May 19. Members asked staff to supply clearer statutory language and for Joint Fiscal Office to provide an updated fiscal note once the committee finalizes the draft, and they signaled continued consideration in a future session.