Property Tax Rates, Tax Burdens and Appraisal Ratios,
1995-96
TTARA Research Foundation - www.ttara.org
Forward and Acknowledgement
The Texas Taxpayers and Research Association (TTARA) and the TTARA Research
Foundation are affiliated non-profit associations of businesses and individuals interested
in state fiscal policy and other public policy issues. They are the successor organizations
to the Texas Association of Taxpayers and the Texas Research League respectively.
TTARA and the TTARA Research Foundation work to improve the business climate of
Texas by fostering sound fiscal and public policy. The TTARA Research Foundation's
role is to conduct research related to economic, fiscal and public policy issues in Texas
and to make factual analyses and issue reports on its studies.
This report issued by the TTARA Research Foundation is the continuation of a series of
like reports begun by the Texas Research League in 1977. It is the 16th time that property
tax rates and appraisal ratios have been presented for comparative purposes.
More often than not, taxpayers are familiar with property tax rates, tax burdens, and
appraised values within their own area, but do not know how their area compares with
others in the state. Compiling comparative statistics for the state's more than 3,500 taxing
jurisdictions would be almost impossible for any individual. This report does not
compare property tax rates and burdens of all taxing jurisdictions in the state, but
provides comparisons for a wide selection of "taxing areas" that were created by selecting
the Texas cities with a 1994 population of 3,500 or more as estimated by the U.S. Census
Bureau and pairing those cities with the major school districts located in the city. In
counties without a city of at least 3,500 population, the most populous city within that
county's limits was selected. The city/school district combination is then paired with all
of the other taxing jurisdictions that overlap the property in that city. Jurisdictions that tax
only a portion of the city, such as municipal utility districts, were not included. Each
city/school district/county/college/hospital/other special district combination is a "taxing
area." A city with several school districts within its boundaries will have several "taxing
areas" - one for each school district combination. Comparisons are provided for a total of
570 "taxing areas" in this report. In addition, the twenty-five largest cities have been
isolated for comparison.
The objective of this report is to provide (1) a uniform basis for comparing overall
property tax burdens in various locales across the state, and (2) level of appraisal
information to allow taxpayers to judge how their property is being appraised in relation
to other types of property. The data displayed is for the 1995-96 tax year (the most recent
year for which statistics are available) and concerns the property taxes paid based on
January 1, 1995 appraisals. These taxes would have been due between October 1, 1995
and January 31, 1996.
The amount of property taxes due on a parcel of property equals that property's appraised
value, less any applicable exemptions, multiplied by a tax rate. In Texas, the total tax bill
on a piece of taxable property is the aggregation of tax bills for each taxing jurisdiction in
which the property is located. The taxable value of the property is estimated by one of the
253 county appraisal districts in the state. This report contains information to assist
taxpayers in evaluating each component of the property tax equation for property located
in the majority of those jurisdictions.
We would like to acknowledge the generous cooperation of the staff of the Property Tax
Division of the State Comptroller's office for providing us with the data necessary to
compile this report, and the diligence of the local officials who report the information to
them. Without their assistance, this report would not be possible.
January 1998
Property Tax Levies
Property taxes supply more revenues in Texas than any other source of government
income -- generating almost $16 billion dollars in the 1995 tax year. This amounted to
42% of all tax dollars collected and greatly exceeded the second leading source, the sales
tax, which provided 28% of the annual revenues. Various other taxes made up the
remaining 30% of the tax revenues, including those on motor vehicles, motor fuels, crude
oil, natural gas, cigarettes, alcohol and corporations
Property taxes in Texas have risen dramatically over the past eleven years, primarily due
to school tax increases. While total property tax levies increased by 97% from 1984 to
1995, school district levies experienced a 124% jump -- from $4.2 billion in 1984 to over
$9.3 billion in 1995 (see Table 1). Counties had the second largest increase over the same
period at 78%, followed by special districts at 73% and cities at 59%.
In recent years, annual property tax growth rates have slowed. In 1995, total tax levies
rose by 3.43%, the lowest yearly increase in over 15 years. School district levies went up
by 3.5%, also marking their lowest rate of growth for well over a decade.
In 1997, Governor George Bush made an unsuccessful attempt to dramatically reduce the
role of the property tax in public school funding. Even though the Governor's bill was
defeated in the Legislature, property tax relief remains at the forefront of the legislative
agenda. In lieu of a sweeping school tax reduction, a constitutional amendment was
approved by voters on August 9, 1997, which increases the homestead exemption for
school property taxes by $10,000. Also approved was an amendment that expands the 65
years and over school tax freeze by authorizing its transfer to an alternate residence.
Table 1
Property Special District
Levy
Tax
$
Levies
1984-
Annual
Increase
County Levy
$
Annual
Increase
City Levy
$
Annual
Increase
1995
Tax Year
1984
950,574,000
13.44%
1,342,782,000
3.99%
1,628,910,000
11.12%
1985
1,056,802,000
11.18%
1,427,755,000
6.33%
1,820,345,000
11.75%
1986
1,141,652,000
8.03%
1,482,295,000
3.82%
1,966,674,000
8.04%
1987
1,176,667,000
3.07%
1,539,953,000
3.89%
2,028,743,000
3.16%
1988
1,232,415,000
4.74%
1,595,183,000
3.59%
2,145,726,000
5.77%
1989
1,284,165,144
4.20%
1,715,691,860
7.55%
2,200,415,156
2.55%
1990
1,354,607,273
5.49%
1,743,176,612
1.60%
2,218,971,749
0.84%
1991
1,459,643,501
7.75%
1,894,013,461
8.65%
2,303,609,801
3.81%
1992
1,492,043,534
2.22%
1,996,116,460
5.39%
2,311,630,199
0.35%
1993
1,535,769,813
2.93%
2,176,974,573
9.06%
2,362,404,482
2.20%
1994
1,620,504,796
5.52%
2,311,389,149
6.17%
2,493,554,910
5.55%
1995
1,650,233,750
1.83%
2,391,961,283
3.49%
2,596,413,272
4.12%
Table 1
continued...
Tax Year
School Levy
$
Annual
Increase
Total Levy
$
Annual
Increase
Increase Over
1984
1984
4,168,955,000
15.12%
8,091,221,000
12.12%
---------
1985
4,663,892,000
11.87%
8,968,794,000
10.85%
10.85%
1986
5,026,592,000
7.78%
9,617,213,000
7.23%
18.86%
1987
5,218,820,000
3.82%
9,964,183,000
3.61%
23.15%
1988
5,575,843,000
6.84%
10,549,167,000
5.87%
30.38%
1989
6,072,227,279
8.90%
11,272,499,439
6.86%
39.32%
1990
6,605,433,619
8.78%
11,922,189,253
5.76%
47.35%
1991
7,566,042,099
14.54%
13,223,308,862
10.91%
63.43%
1992
8,181,309,478
8.13%
13,981,099,671
5.73%
72.79%
1993
8,681,859,148
6.12%
14,757,008,016
5.55%
82.38%
1994
9,024,885,601
3.95%
15,450,334,456
4.70%
90.95%
1995
9,341,442,296
3.51%
15,980,050,601
3.43%
97.50%
Property Values
Keeping track of property values in Texas is more complicated than it might appear to be.
Texas actually maintains two sets of property values for school districts: local values,
which are determined by the 253 appraisal districts in the state, and certified values,
which are determined by the Comptroller of Public Accounts. The amount of taxes due
on a piece of property is determined by its local value. Certified values are used by the
Commissioner of Education to determine the amount of state aid that a school district
receives.
Because property taxes are levied ad-valorem, meaning according to value, much
attention is paid to property valuations. Since school property tax values are the basis for
distributing billions of dollars of state aid, they are the ones most closely examined. As
mentioned above, property in Texas is appraised by 253 county appraisal districts, each
with its own valuation methods. Thus, as a result of variations in local appraisal practices,
a similar piece of property might be valued differently depending on its location in the
state. Property values determined by each appraisal district are submitted to the various
taxing jurisdictions within the district's boundaries. Each taxing jurisdiction then
determines taxable property values by deducting state mandated and any approved local
option exemptions. These values are commonly referred to as "local values" and are used
to determine the amount of taxes due by applying the local jurisdiction's tax rate. Since a
single piece of property may be taxed by as many as 9 or 10 local taxing units, many
different taxable values may be assigned to the property after applicable exemptions are
applied.
The Texas Constitution requires all property to be taxed in an equal and uniform manner.
To ensure that different types of property are appraised equitably, Texas law requires the
Comptroller of Public Accounts to conduct a "property value study" to compare local
appraised values to market values as determined by the Comptroller in each school
district in the state. The Comptroller must determine the taxable value of all property and
of each category of property to ensure that different types of property are appraised at the
same level and that some categories of property are not over-appraised while others are
under-appraised. If the Comptroller finds that the appraisal district used generally
accepted appraisal standards and practices to determine the value for a particular category
of property and that assigned values are valid, the appraisal roll value of that category of
property is presumed to be the "taxable" value. If not, the Comptroller estimates the
taxable value of that category and assigns that value. These values then are certified by
the Comptroller to be the "taxable" value for the district and are forwarded to the
Commissioner of Education for use in determining how much state money the school
district will receive for operations. These values are a mix of local and state-determined
values and do not reflect the deduction of local option exemptions granted by school
districts.
Therefore, total statewide "local values" and "certified values" are very different numbers
and can cause much confusion. Most press reports about statewide property value
changes refer to the Comptroller's certified values for school districts because they are
more easily obtained and verified. They are not, however, the values that should be of
concern to taxpayers around the state -- local values reflect the actual value that is taxed
by a school district. In order to best study why taxes have increased so dramatically over
time, local values should be examined. Table 2 illustrates how local tax roll values have
changed over the last eleven years. Chart 1 shows the change in value for each category
of property. Table 3 compares total statewide local taxable values with the Comptroller's
certified values from 1985-95.
Seven of the fourteen categories of property appraised locally have declined in value
since 1985, while seven have increased. The most dramatic drops in market value (other
than vehicles which aren't taxed in many areas) have been in oil, gas and mineral property
which has lost almost 63% of its value and in real property inventory (unsold new
houses) which decreased by over 32% during this period. In contrast, commercial
personal property (largely the value of inventories) increased almost 64%, utility property
increased approximately 35%, and single-family residential property increased by 34%.
On a statewide basis, local market values, values exempted and taxable values have all
increased approximately 7% since 1985.
Table 2
Local Tax Roll Values - School Districts 1985-1995
(Billions of Dollars)
Category
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
A.
Single-family Residential $223.8 $241.8 $241.6 $240.9 $238.0 $241.2
B.
Multi-family Residential
31.1
34.2
31.7
28.6
25.9
25.3
C.
Vacant Lots
26.8
30.9
31.6
27.3
26.7
25.1
D/E. Rural Real (Market)
117.3 127.6 125.5 123.4 118.1 112.2
F1.
Commercial Real
88.7 103.3 103.5 104.6
98.7
96.7
F2.
Industrial Real
45.8
42.6
42.2
41.7
43.4
45.3
G.
Oil, Gas & Minerals
86.6
68.6
51.9
49.0
46.7
50.2
H
Vehicles
.8
.7
.5
.5
.5
.4
J.
Utilities
35.4
38.3
39.6
41.5
43.1
45.4
L1. Commercial Personal
37.5
41.9
44.0
45.5
48.3
49.4
L2. Industrial Personal
28.4
27.0
23.8
24.4
26.9
29.0
M.
Other Personal
3.9
3.9
3.5
3.2
3.1
2.9
N.
Intangible Personal
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
O.
Real Property Inventory
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
1.5
1.3
Category
1985
1986
1987
1988
Total Market Value
$726.4
$760.9 $739.5 $732.6 $721.0 $726.6
% Change from
Previous Yr.
9.6%
4.7%
-2.8%
1989
-0.9%
-1.6%
1990
0.8%
Less Exempts. And Val.
$118.8
Red.
$131.2 $128.9 $124.9 $121.8 $123.9
Total Value Taxed
$629.7 $610.6 $607.7 $599.2 $602.7
$607.6
% Change from
Previous Yr.
3.6%
-3.0%
-0.5%
-1.4%
0.6%
Table 2 continued
Category
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
85-95
Change
A.
Single-family Residential
$246.2
$251.3
$264.1
$281.3
$300.8
34.4%
B.
Multi-family Residential
25.6
24.8
25.3
26.9
29.6
-4.8%
C.
Vacant Lots
22.7
20.8
19.1
19.0
19.1
-28.7%
D/E.
Rural Real (Market)
106.3
100.0
95.3
94.9
95.4
-18.7%
F1.
Commercial Real
94.4
91.2
88.9
88.9
96.7
9.0%
F2.
Industrial Real
48.4
50.4
51.6
53.2
51.2
11.8%
50.4
45.7
42.8
37.7
32.2
-62.8%
Vehicles
.3
.2
.2
.2
0.2
-75.0%
J.
Utilities
46.6
48.1
49.3
50.1
47.7
34.7%
L1.
Commercial Personal
51.9
52.8
54.7
56.8
61.4
63.7%
L2.
Industrial Personal
31.4
32.3
32.6
33.7
36.3
27.8%
M.
Other Personal
3.1
2.8
2.8
2.8
3.1
-20.5%
N.
Intangible Personal
3.3
3.9
4.5
1.6
3.2
60.6%
O.
Real Property Inventory
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.3
-31.6%
1993
1994
1995
G.
Oil, Gas & Minerals
H
85-95
Change
Category
1991
1992
Total Market Value
$732.0
$725.6 $732.6 $748.3 $778.0 7.1%
% Change from
Previous Yr.
0.7%
-0.9%
Less Exempts. And Val.
Red.
$130.3
$133.3 $132.1 $133.3 $127.1 7.0%
Total Value Taxed
$601.7
$592.3 $600.5 $615.0 $650.9 7.1%
% Change from
Previous Yr.
-0.1%
-1.5%
1.0%
1.4%
2.1%
2.4%
4.0%
5.8%
* Change is calculated using the first year of valuation as base year.
All numbers are local reported data.
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Table 3
Comparison of Local Taxable Values and Certified Taxable Values, 1986 - 1995
Year
Local
Taxable
Value
Certified
Taxable
Value
% Diff.
1986
$629.7
$691.9
10%
1987
$610.6
$668.7
10%
1988
$607.7
$646.1
6%
1989
$599.2
$631.3
5%
1990
$602.7
$630.0
5%
1991
$601.7
$627.2
4%
1992
$592.3
$621.1
5%
1993
$600.5
$620.7
3%
1994
$615.0
$636.6
4%
1995
$650.9
$660.0
1%
Chart 1
Property Tax Exemptions and Special Valuations
A property tax exemption is an exclusion of property from taxation. It can be partial -exempting part of property value from taxation, or absolute -- exempting property from
taxation entirely. The major types of exclusions are described below. Table 4 displays
statistical details of their impacts on Texas school districts.
Residence homestead exemptions are the most common type and are granted to
homeowners on their principal residence if certain qualifications are met. State law
mandates some homestead exemptions, allows others to be granted at local option, and
authorizes additional exemptions for elderly or disabled homeowners.
State mandated exemptions exclude from a homestead's valuation: (1) $5,000 ($15,000
beginning in the 1997 tax year) for school tax purposes, (2) an additional $10,000 for
school taxes for homeowners that are over 65 years of age or disabled, and (3) $3,000 for
the portion of county taxes levied for farm-to-market roads or flood control.
Additional optional homestead exemptions which may be granted at the discretion of
local taxing units (including school districts, cities and counties) include: (1) up to 20%
of appraised value with a $5,000 minimum, and (2) at least an additional $3,000 for
elderly or disabled homeowners, but not to exceed 20%.
Those who receive an over-65 homestead exemption automatically qualify for a tax
ceiling whereby the school taxes on their home are frozen at the amount owed in the year
for which they first qualified for an elderly exemption. Unless improvements are added,
school taxes on an elderly taxpayer's homestead cannot increase as long as it remains
their principal residence. Beginning in the 1997 tax year, homeowners with a tax ceiling
will be able to transfer the ceiling to an alternate residence in a proportionate amount to
the value of the new home as the old ceiling was to the value of the old home.
The value of property excluded from school taxes through homestead exemptions and
elderly tax freezes increased almost 50% between 1986 and 1995 -- from $50.6 billion to
$76 billion. School districts currently exempt approximately 25% of the single-family
residential property value on the tax rolls.
Special valuation provisions apply to agricultural land, timber land, recreational, park and
scenic land, and public access airport property. Such qualified property is valued by
capitalizing only the income derived from the special use, rather than at market value.
This is sometimes referred to as "productivity valuation" or "ag use value." This is not an
exemption, but rather a prescribed method to establish value while the property is being
used in specific ways. When the use changes, the special valuation is lost.
Table 4 shows the property values exempted by school districts from 1986-1995 and the
reductions in value due to productivity valuation techniques. Agricultural land taxable
value was reduced by over $38 billion in 1995 due to productivity valuation reductions.
However, this reduction is still 52% less than that of 1986 when productivity valuation
reductions amounted to $80.2 billion.
To attract businesses to their communities, local taxing units can enter into tax abatement
agreements that exempt all or a portion of the value of new or expanded facilities for a
specific period of time not to exceed ten years. Additional incentives may be provided by
tax increment financing and "freeport" exemptions.
Tax abatements, which were authorized by voters in 1981, are agreements to defer adding
property to the tax roll for a specific period. Tax increment financing is a procedure that
freezes property values in a defined area at a particular point in time and dedicates taxes
collected on any value increase after that time to specific purposes. Abatements and
TIF's, which amounted to a little over $400 million in 1986, have grown to over $13
billion in recent years and have leveled off. This is probably due to a change in school
finance laws that mandates the inclusion of abated property in the district's value for state
aid calculation purposes, even though it is not taxed.
"Freeport" exemptions apply to property that is only temporarily located in the state prior
to being shipped out of the state. Over $3.35 billion in school district value was lost in
1995 due to freeport exemptions, compared to $1 billion in 1986. As authorized by the
voters in 1989, freeport property is exempt unless the school district board of trustees
voted to tax it by April 1, 1990.
School districts currently exempt 5.3% of commercial and industrial property through
these freeport exemptions, abatements and TIF agreements.
Table 4
Property Tax Exemptions and Special Valuations Granted by School Districts
1986
Single Family Residential Property Market Value $ 241.8
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
$ 241.6
$ 240.9
$ 238.0
$ 241.2
$ 246.2
State Homestead/Over 65/Veteran
Exemptions
21.6
22.3
23.0
24.0
25.4
28.3
Tax Limit Freeze on Over 65
Homesteads
12.2
11.2
11.3
11.1
11.4
14.7
Optional Percentage Homestead
Exemptions
13.9
13.3
11.1
10.6
11.3
11.6
Optional Over 65/Veterans Exemptions 2.9
3.3
3.4
3.7
3.8
3.8
Subtotal Residential Exemptions
$50.6
$50.1
$48.8
$49.4
$51.9
$58.4
Residential Taxable Value
$191.2
$191.5
$192.1
$188.6
$189.3
$187.8
% of Single Family Residential Value
Not Taxed
20.9%
20.7%
20.2%
20.7%
21.5%
23.7%
$127.6
$125.5
$123.4
$118.1
$112.2
$106.3
Productivity Valuation Reductions
$ 80.2
$ 78.4
$ 75.7
$ 71.6
$ 68.2
$ 64.6
Acreage Taxable Value
$ 47.4
$ 47.1
$ 47.7
$ 46.5
$ 44.0
$ 41.7
% of Acreage Value Not Taxed
62.8%
62.5%
61.3%
60.6%
60.8%
60.8%
Commercial/Industrial Real and Personal Market
$214.8
Value
$213.5
$216.2
$217.3
$220.4
$226.1
Acreage Market Value
Tax Abatement/Tax Increment
Financing/Freeport Exemptions
$ 0.4
$ 0.4
$ 0.4
$ 0.8
$ 3.8
$ 7.3
Commercial/Industrial Real and
Personal Taxable Value
$214.4
$213.1
$215.8
$216.5
$216.6
$218.8
% of Comm./Indus. Real and Personal
Value Not Taxed
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.4%
1.7%
3.2%
1992
1993
1994
1995
$ 251.3
$ 264.1
$ 281.3
$ 300.8
24.4%
State Homestead/Over 65/Veteran
Exemptions
32.2
34.8
36.3
37.9
75.5%
Tax Limit Freeze on Over 65
Homesteads
14.6
13.4
21.1
18.8
54.1%
Optional Percentage Homestead
Exemptions
11.8
12.4
9.6
14.7
5.7%
Optional Over 65/Veterans Exemptions 3.9
4.0
4.3
4.4
51.7%
Subtotal Residential Exemptions
$62.5
$64.6
$71.3
$75.9
49.9%
Residential Taxable Value
$188.8
$199.5
$210.0
$224.9
17.6%
% of Single Family Residential Value
Not Taxed
24.9%
24.5%
25.3%
25.2%
$100.0
$95.3
$94.9
$95.4
-25.2%
Productivity Valuation Reductions
$ 60.0
$54.0
$47.6
$38.2
-52.4%
Acreage Taxable Value
$ 40.0
$41.3
$47.3
$57.2
20.7%
% of Acreage Value Not Taxed
60.0%
56.7%
50.2%
40.0%
Commercial/Industrial Real and Personal
Market Value
$226.7
$227.8
$232.6
$248.8
15.8%
Tax Abatement/Tax Increment
Financing/Freeport Exemptions
$ 10.8
$ 13.5
$ 14.4
$ 13.1
n/a *
Commercial/Industrial Real and
Personal Taxable Value
$215.9
$214.3
$218.2
$ 235.7
9.9%
% of Comm./Indus. Real and Personal
Value Not Taxed
4.8%
5.9%
6.2%
5.3%
Table 4 continued
Single Family Residential Property Market
Value
Acreage Market Value
1986-95
Increase/Decrease
Property Tax Rates
Approximately 3,500 jurisdictions in Texas have authority to tax property, and each
governing body has considerable leeway to determine the tax rate that it will levy.
Property tax rates, which are expressed in dollars and cents per $100 value, have risen
significantly over the last decade. While the reasons for the increases have varied, the
most common causes have been fluctuating or stagnant property values, population
growth or increased government spending.
Table 5 shows the number of jurisdictions, the simple average, lowest, and highest
nominal tax rates for the major types of taxing jurisdictions in Texas in 1995. If a single
parcel of property were subject to taxation by all such districts at their average rates, the
total property tax rate would amount to $3.22 per $100 value. However, actual tax rates
vary widely around the mean depending on the location of the property being taxed. The
tables in the appendices to this report are designed to assist in comparing tax rates
applicable to property located in various parts of the state.
The average 1995 tax rate for cities was slightly above 46 cents per $100 value. Of the
992 cities reporting, ten reported a rate of $0.00. For those cities with a rate higher than
zero, China Grove (Bexar County) had the lowest rate at $.017, and Woodloch
(Montgomery County) had the highest at $1.56.
The average tax rate for the 1,038 school districts was about $1.37 per $100 value, less
than a two cent increase over the 1994 average. Though the average 1995 school district
rate approximates that of 1994, the spread between the high and low rates has narrowed
significantly. Palo Pinto ISD had the lowest rate in 1995 at $0.84, which is $0.38 higher
than the previous year's low. Huffman ISD once again had the high rate at $1.97 - $.06
lower than its 1994 rate.
Tax rates for the 254 counties in Texas averaged about $0.48 per $100 value. The range
of county tax rates was from a low of $0.16 in Somervell County (site of a nuclear power
plant), to a high of $1.21 in Jim Hogg County. Fifty-two community and junior college
districts levied property taxes in 1995, with an average tax rate of $0.13 per $100 value.
Southwest Texas Junior College (Uvalde County) again had the lowest rate at $0.04.
Rates for the 131 hospital districts averaged $0.22.
In many locations, special districts have been created to carry out specific government
functions. Over 1,000 such districts exist in Texas today. They include: municipal utility
districts, drainage districts, water districts, road districts, and fire districts, just to name a
few. Tax rates for these districts ranged from lows of less than $0.01 per $100 to a high
of $7.90 in the VIA ranch WCID (Fort Bend County). The average rate for special
district taxes was $0.56.
Table 5
Taxing Jurisdiction Average, Low and High Nominal Rates per $100 Value
No.
Entities
Avg. Rate Low Rate
Low
Jurisdication
High Rate High Jurisdiction
Cities
992
$0.4654
$0.0172
China Grove
(Bexar Co.)
$1.5600
School
Districts
1,038
$1.3670
$0.8400
Palo Pinto ISD
$1.9700
(Palo Pinto Co.)
Huffman ISD
(Harris Co.)
Counties
254
$0.4829
$0.1590
Somervell
County
Jim Hogg County
Jr. Colleges
52
$0.1306
$0.0410
SW TX Jr.
College (Uvalde $0.2908
Co.)
Western TX
College (Scurry
Co.)
Hospitals
131
$0.2178
$0.0100
Texhoma
Hospital
(Sherman Co.)
$0.6399
Stonewall County
Hospital
Other
1,000+
$0.5636
$0.0006
Gillespie
County WCID
$7.9000
Via Ranch WCID
(Fort Bend Co.)
$1.2100
Woodloch
(Montgomery Co.)
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appraisal Ratios
Property taxes comprise a very large share of total taxes in Texas. Therefore, it is
important that the values on which property taxes are based be determined in an accurate
and professional manner. Equitable appraisal means that all property throughout the state
is treated uniformly. This is especially difficult considering that property in Texas is
appraised not by one central unit, but by 253 separate appraisal districts (one for each
county, except for a joint district in Potter and Randall counties).
The Comptroller of Public Accounts is charged with establishing standards for the
appraisal of property and for reviewing the work of the appraisal districts. To carry out
this responsibility, the Property Tax Division (PTD) of the Comptroller's office conducts
an annual Property Value Study. This study uses a sample of the 13.5 million parcels of
property in Texas and a review of the procedures used by the appraisal districts to
evaluate the level and uniformity of appraisals by the county appraisal districts. The PTD
calculates a median appraisal ratio for each category of property and for each appraisal
district. These ratios measure how close appraised values are to market. A ratio of one
signifies that property is appraised at full market value. A ratio above one indicates
property is appraised above market value, and the opposite is true for a ratio below one.
Over the past 10 years, appraisals have become increasingly more accurate, as shown in
Table 6. Overall statewide appraisal ratios have reached 100 percent, up from 90 percent
in 1985. The differences between ratios for different categories of property also have
been narrowed. However, significant differences still exist between appraisal districts and
between categories of property within different appraisal districts. The "adjusted tax
rates" and "tax burdens" shown in the appendices result from using the appraisal ratios
calculated by the Comptroller's office to adjust "nominal" local rates to provide estimates
which are comparable across the state.
Table 6
Median Appraisal Ratios 1986-1995
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
A.
Single-family Residential
0.94
0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
0.98 0.98 .98
B.
Multi-family Residential
0.94
0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 0.99 .99
C.
Vacant Lots
0.90
0.92 0.93 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
D.
Acreage (Market Value) *
0.90
0.93 0.94 0.96 0.98 0.99 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
E.
Farm & Ranch Improvements
0.90
0.92 0.93 *
*
F1. Commercial Real
0.90
0.92 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.98 0.99
1.00 1.00 1.00
F2. Industrial Real
1.00
1.00 1.00 **
**
G.
Oil, Gas & Minerals
1.09
1.10 1.06 1.04 1.02 1.03 1.02
1.04 1.03 1.02
J.
Utilities
0.97
0.95 0.97 1.01 1.04 1.06 1.02
1.00 1.01 1.02
L1. Commercial Personal
0.91
0.92 0.92 0.93 0.96 0.97 0.98
1.00 1.00 1.00
L2. Industrial Personal
1.00
1.00 1.00 **
**
**
**
**
M. Other Personal
0.94
1.05 0.97 0.98 0.99 1.06 **
**
**
**
*
**
**
*
**
**
*
**
*
**
*
**
O.
Residential Inventory
n/a
n/a
1.08 1.06 1.00 1.03 **
Overall
0.93
0.95 0.96 0.97 0.99 0.99 0.99
**
**
**
0.99 0.99 1.00
* Beginning in 1989, taxable values for Farm & Ranch Improvements (formerly Category E) were merged
into Category D with Acreage (market value). Therefore, Category D for 1989 and subsequent years is not
directly comparable to Category D in previous years.
** Too few sample observations were available to produce meaningful statewide median appraisal ratios
for these properties.
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Twenty-Five Largest Cities
According to the 1990 Census, over one-half of the population in Texas resides in the
state's 25 largest cities. Thus, a majority of Texans are affected by the property taxes
levied in these cities. Table 7 on the following page shows the property tax rates for the
major "taxing areas" encompassing these cities and how they rank within the twenty-five.
As explained in the forward of this document, a "taxing area" is a city/school district
combination which is then paired with all of the other taxing jurisdictions that overlap the
property in that city. Jurisdictions that tax only a portion of the city, such as municipal
utility districts, are not included. Each city/school district/county/college/hospital/other
special district combination is a "taxing area." A city with several school districts within
its boundaries will have several "taxing areas" -- one for each school district combination.
The comparisons in Table 7 are for the largest school district "taxing area" in each of the
twenty-five largest cities.
The cities are ranked by nominal rate and adjusted rate. The nominal rate is the actual
rate levied on property within the area. The adjusted rate reflects the rate a taxpayer
would pay if the property were appraised at 100% of market value using the school
district's average appraisal ratio.
Fort Worth (Tarrant County) has the highest nominal and adjusted total tax rates at $2.98
and $2.93, respectively. Laredo (Webb County) has the lowest nominal ($2.23) and
adjusted ($2.18) tax rates, largely because of its low school district rate of $1.17.
Table 8 shows the tax burden on property valued at $100,000 in the residential
homestead, commercial real, industrial real, oil and gas, and utility categories in each
area, and each city is ranked within each category of property. The tax burden was
calculated by taking $100,000 of market value, deducting all pertinent exemptions for
each property category for each taxing jurisdiction, adjusting for the appraisal ratio for
each category and multiplying the resulting value by the tax rate of each jurisdiction.
Of the 25 largest cities, San Antonio has the highest tax burden on residential property.
Laredo (Webb County) has the lowest. Fort Worth's property taxes are highest in the
commercial and industrial real categories. Wichita Falls' and Laredo's levies are lowest in
commercial and industrial real properties, respectively. In those cities where oil and gas
property exists, the levies range from a low of $2,226 in Laredo to a high of $2,860 in
Corpus Christi. For utility property, San Antonio is highest for the group and Laredo is
lowest.
Table 7
1995 Property Tax Rates per $100 Value Twenty-Five Largest Texas Cities
ISD
Avg
Ratio
Total Nominal Adjusted
Total
HosRate
Nominal Adjusted Rate
City ISD County College pital Other Rate
Rank
Rate
Rank
City
County
ABILENE
Taylor
103.05% 0.56 1.41
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
$2.36
$2.43
21
18
AMARILLO
Potter
97.55% 0.27 1.35
0.47
0.17
0.18
0.00
$2.44
$2.38
18
20
ARLINGTON Tarrant
98.59% 0.64 1.35
0.27
0.06
0.24
0.00
$2.55
$2.52
15
15
AUSTIN
100.78% 0.53 1.28
0.52
0.05
0.00
0.00
$2.39
$2.41
20
19
BEAUMONT Jefferson
99.29% 0.62 1.42
0.37
0.00
0.00
0.29
$2.69
$2.67
8
6
BROWNSVILLE
Cameron
98.62% 0.65 1.34
0.32
0.09
0.00
0.15
$2.55
$2.52
14
14
CORPUS
CHRISTI
Nueces
98.84% 0.61 1.43
0.28
0.20
0.24
0.10
$2.86
$2.83
3
3
DALLAS
Dallas
98.95% 0.67 1.42
0.22
0.05
0.20
0.01
$2.56
$2.54
13
13
EL PASO
El Paso
96.42% 0.65 1.52
0.28
0.10
0.19
0.00
$2.75
$2.65
6
8
FORT
WORTH
Tarrant
98.18% 0.96 1.46
0.27
0.06
0.24
0.00
$2.98
$2.93
1
1
GARLAND
Dallas
97.63% 0.63 1.44
0.22
0.05
0.20
0.01
$2.55
$2.49
16
17
GRAND
PRAIRIE
Dallas
98.75% 0.70 1.47
0.22
0.05
0.20
0.01
$2.64
$2.60
9
11
HOUSTON
Harris
97.75% 0.67 1.38
0.41
0.06
0.12
0.09
$2.73
$2.67
7
7
IRVING
Dallas
97.73% 0.51 1.64
0.22
0.05
0.20
0.01
$2.62
$2.56
10
12
LAREDO
Webb
97.72% 0.55 1.17
0.35
0.16
0.00
0.00
$2.23
$2.18
25
25
LUBBOCK
Lubbock
98.40% 0.59 1.47
0.17
0.00
0.10
0.00
$2.32
$2.29
23
24
MCALLEN
Hidalgo
98.97% 0.45 1.35
0.45
0.00
0.00
0.08
$2.32
$2.30
24
23
MESQUITE
Dallas
99.39% 0.54 1.50
0.22
0.05
0.20
0.01
$2.52
$2.50
17
16
MIDLAND
Midland
100.60% 0.67 1.39
0.26
0.11
0.17
0.00
$2.61
$2.63
11
9
ODESSA
Ector
100.08% 0.61 1.41
0.45
0.20
0.11
0.00
$2.78
$2.78
5
4
PASADENA
Harris
97.87% 0.65 1.45
0.41
0.11
0.12
0.09
$2.83
$2.77
4
5
PLANO
Collin
99.38% 0.50 1.49
0.26
0.10
0.00
0.00
$2.35
$2.33
22
22
SAN
ANTONIO
Bexar
99.77% 0.58 1.55
0.37
0.11
0.24
0.03
$2.88
$2.87
2
2
WACO
McLennan 101.09% 0.67 1.42
0.43
0.07
0.00
0.00
$2.59
$2.62
12
10
WICHITA
FALLS
Wichita
0.37
0.00
0.00
0.00
$2.39
$2.38
19
21
Travis
99.50% 0.68 1.34
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Table 8
1995 Property Tax Burden on $100,000 Property
Twenty-Five Largest Texas Cities
Tax Burden by Category of Property
Residential Commercial Industrial
Homestead
Real
Real
Oil and
Gas
Utilities
$2,362
$2,362
$2,564
$2,736
$2,441
n/a
$2,647
$2,272
$2,600
$2,552
n/a
$2,732
Travis
$2,247
$2,371
$2,387
$2,387
$2,561
Jefferson
$2,475
$2,659
$2,692
$2,692
$2,898
BROWNSVILLE Cameron
$2,388
$2,675
$2,554
n/a
$2,785
CORPUS
CHRISTI
Nueces
$2,607
$2,893
$2,860
$2,860
$3,004
DALLAS
Dallas
$2,156
$2,570
$2,564
$2,564
$2,780
EL PASO
El Paso
$2,503
$2,557
$2,752
$2,752
$2,930
FORT WORTH
Tarrant
$2,588
$3,007
$2,980
n/a
$3,115
GARLAND
Dallas
$2,400
$2,463
$2,551
$2,551
$2,626
GRAND
PRAIRIE
Dallas
$2,454
$2,636
$2,638
n/a
$2,927
HOUSTON
Harris
$2,036
$2,759
$2,732
$2,732
$2,954
IRVING
Dallas
$2,100
$2,505
$2,618
n/a
$2,679
LAREDO
Webb
$1,996
$2,244
$2,226
$2,226
$2,358
LUBBOCK
Lubbock
$2,165
$2,322
$2,323
$2,323
$2,564
MCALLEN
Hidalgo
$2,173
$2,375
$2,323
$2,323
$2,490
MESQUITE
Dallas
$2,371
$2,594
$2,516
n/a
$2,701
MIDLAND
Midland
$2,399
$2,677
$2,613
$2,657
$2,754
ODESSA
Ector
$2,147
$2,913
$2,780
$2,855
$2,961
PASADENA
Harris
$2,496
$2,673
$2,832
$2,832
$2,958
PLANO
Collin
$2,143
$2,365
$2,346
n/a
$2,410
SAN ANTONIO
Bexar
$2,850
$2,873
$2,881
n/a
$3,158
WACO
McLennan
$2,414
$2,811
$2,592
n/a
$2,741
WICHITA
FALLS
Wichita
$2,337
$2,214
$2,389
$2,389
$2,578
City
County
ABILENE
Taylor
$2,029
$2,690
AMARILLO
Potter
$2,189
ARLINGTON
Tarrant
AUSTIN
BEAUMONT
Table 8 continued
Tax Burden Rank by Category of Property
Residential Commercial Industrial
Homestead
Real
Real
Oil and
Gas
Utilities
21
12
21
7
18
n/a
17
14
14
15
n/a
14
Travis
15
21
20
11
22
Jefferson
6
12
8
6
9
BROWNSVILLE Cameron
11
10
14
n/a
10
City
County
ABILENE
Taylor
24
8
AMARILLO
Potter
16
ARLINGTON
Tarrant
AUSTIN
BEAUMONT
CORPUS
CHRISTI
Nueces
2
3
3
1
3
DALLAS
Dallas
19
16
13
8
11
EL PASO
El Paso
4
17
6
4
7
FORT WORTH
Tarrant
3
1
1
n/a
2
GARLAND
Dallas
9
19
16
9
18
GRAND
PRAIRIE
Dallas
7
13
9
n/a
8
HOUSTON
Harris
23
6
7
5
6
IRVING
Dallas
22
18
10
n/a
16
LAREDO
Webb
25
24
25
15
25
LUBBOCK
Lubbock
18
23
23
13
20
MCALLEN
Hidalgo
17
20
24
14
23
MESQUITE
Dallas
12
15
17
n/a
15
MIDLAND
Midland
10
9
11
7
12
ODESSA
Ector
20
2
5
2
4
PASADENA
Harris
5
11
4
3
5
PLANO
Collin
21
22
22
n/a
24
SAN ANTONIO Bexar
1
4
2
n/a
1
WACO
McLennan
8
5
12
n/a
13
WICHITA
FALLS
Wichita
13
25
19
10
19
School Tax Rate Trends
Everyone is aware that school district tax rates have risen dramatically over the past 10
years. The average school district nominal tax rate has increased 65% since 1986, rising
to $1.40 in 1996. During this time, interesting shifts have taken place within various
ranges of tax rates which are illustrated in Chart 2. The most prominent trend line on the
chart is the change in the number of school districts with tax rates below $1.00. Between
1988 and 1996, the number of school districts levying a tax at a rate of less than $1.00
plummeted from 652 to only 10, while the number of districts taxing at rates between
$1.21 and $1.50 increased substantially.
A number of factors contributed to the rapid rise in school tax rates, including growing
enrollments, increasing operating costs and stagnant tax bases. However, changes in
school finance laws in response to court rulings also provided powerful incentives for
school districts to increase tax rates. The school finance system was under review in
Texas Courts from 1984 - 1993, and was ruled unconstitutional on three separate
occasions during that time.
In 1989, the state of Texas implemented its first guaranteed yield program which required
the state to guarantee a certain amount of money ($18.25 per weighted student [WADA]
per penny) to school districts for a certain number of pennies of tax rate levied ($0.36)
above the rate required to receive state funds ($0.54). The state would make up the
difference between what the district raised and the guaranteed amount. This provision
was a very large incentive for school districts to raise their tax rates to draw down more
state money. In the 1989 tax year, a great number of districts took advantage of this new
provision, illustrated by the dramatic shift of districts moving from a tax rate of under
$1.00 to one between $1.00 and $1.20.
In late 1989, the Texas Supreme Court declared the school finance system to be
unconstitutional and ordered the Legislature to implement a system that "provides
substantially equal access" to revenues for districts at similar tax effort by May 1, 1990.
The Legislature responded with SB 1 in 1990 which increased the guaranteed yield
program to $26.05 per WADA per penny of tax rate for $0.48, and which raised the tax
rate that a district must levy in order to receive state funds to $0.70. This was further
impetus for school districts to increase tax rates. Chart 2 shows that in 1990, a great many
more districts shifted from a rate of below $1.00 to a rate between $1.00 and $1.20.
The school finance system was once again declared unconstitutional in 1991, and the
Legislature responded with SB 351, which created 188 county education districts (CEDs)
that consolidated school district tax bases along county lines - except in the case of
wealthy districts, whose CEDs included surrounding counties. This bill caused the most
significant and widespread increases in school tax rates, because it required all school
districts (through the CEDs) to levy a tax rate of at least $0.72 in the first year, $0.82 the
second year, $0.92 the third year, and finally $1.00, as well as increasing the guaranteed
yield amount even more to $28.00 per WADA per penny in the fourth year. Revenue
raised by the CED tax was shared by all of the districts in the CED. Almost all school
districts levied a tax on top of the CED rate to maintain current revenues. The chart
shows that in the 1991 tax year - the first year that CEDs existed - the number of school
districts taxing at a rate below $1.00 plummeted while those taxing between $1.21 $1.40 increased dramatically.
In 1992 the Texas Supreme Court once again ruled that the school finance system was
unconstitutional because the tax that the CEDs levied was not approved by the voters in
each CED and the rate they levied was determined by the state. The Court determined
that the combination of those two factors constituted a state property tax which is
prohibited by the Texas Constitution.
The Legislature met in 1993 to once again deal with a school finance crisis. After toying
with the idea of school district consolidation -- which was quickly dismissed -- S. B. 7,
the current "Robin Hood" system, was passed. The system requires very wealthy districts
to choose one or more of five options to lower their property wealth level. The bill
contained a "hold harmless provision" which allows wealthy districts to maintain the
same level of spending as they had before SB 7 was passed, but at an effective tax rate of
$1.50. This was an incentive for those wealthy districts that couldn't - or wouldn't - lower
their spending levels, to once again increase their tax rates. The increases weren't as
dramatic this time around, though - the biggest "bump" for wealthy districts came with
the implementation of the CEDs. In addition, the Legislature increased the number of
pennies for which districts could receive guaranteed yield funds to $0.64, bringing the
total rate equalized at some level by the state to $1.50. This was further incentive for
districts to increase rates because they received state money for higher rates, and the chart
shows that beginning in 1991, there has been a rapid increase in the number of districts
that levy a rate between $1.41 and $1.50.
The Supreme Court declared SB 7 constitutional in 1993. With a court approved school
finance plan in place, and no further increases in the guaranteed yield program since that
time, increases in school tax rates have gradually evened out. But as a result of all of the
factors listed above, Texas has very high property tax rates, with over half of the property
taxes in Texas paid to schools.
Chart 2
Download MS Excel file for:
Appendix A | Appendix B | Appendix C | Appendix D | Appendix E | Appendix F
Appendices Summary
The following appendices compare the 1995 property tax rates, burdens and appraisal
ratios applicable to various types of property located in cities around the state. Data is
shown for property situated in the 386 cities with a 1994 population of 3,500 or more as
estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau. This edition also includes data for cities within
counties where no cities of population 3,500 or greater exist. Where this applies, the most
densely populated city for these counties has been selected. Aggregate and individual
taxing jurisdiction information is displayed for the applicable city, school district, county,
community or junior college, hospital and other special districts whose boundaries
encompass the entire city. Not included is data on any special districts that encompass
only a portion of a city's tax base. The result is a list of 570 city/school
district/county/college/hospital/other combinations, or "taxing areas," for which
comparisons are made. A city with several school districts within its boundaries will have
several "taxing areas" -- one for each school district combination.
Appendix A lists the tax rates in the 570 taxing areas and ranks the total adjusted rates.
The tax rates adopted by the city, school district, junior college, hospital, and other
special districts were combined to get the total nominal rates. The total nominal rates then
were multiplied by the school district average appraisal ratio to derive "total adjusted
rates," allowing for the equitable comparison of tax rates and burdens. The taxing areas
are ranked from highest to lowest total adjusted rate.
Appendix B shows the data in Appendix A sorted alphabetically by city.
Appendix C displays the taxes that would be due in each taxing area on various types of
property with actual market values of $100,000. Tax burdens and rankings are presented
for residential homestead, commercial real, industrial real, oil and gas, and utility
properties. The data are sorted alphabetically by city. The residential homestead numbers
take into account the school district, city and county local option and state mandated
homestead exemptions that are granted to all homeowners. Adjustments were not made to
account for exemptions that are available only to special groups of taxpayers, such as the
65-and-over and veterans homestead exemptions, abatements and freeport exemptions. In
the tax burden calculations, nominal tax rates were adjusted by the appraisal ratio
applicable to each specific type of property in the named school district.
Appendix D lists for each school district the nominal maintenance and operations (M &
O), interest and sinking fund (I & S), and total tax rates and the appraisal ratios for each
category of property. The data is sorted alphabetically by school district.
Appendix E lists for each county the Farm to Market (F/M) Flood Control, General Fund
and Special Road and Bridge rates and ranks the total rates.
Appendix F shows the data in Appendix E sorted alphabetically by County.
Appendix G contains definitions.
Appendix A
1995 Property Tax Rates per $100 Value (By Adjusted Rate Rank)
Appendix A lists the tax rates in the 570 taxing areas and ranks the total adjusted rates.
The tax rates adopted by the city, school district, junior college, hospital, and other
special districts were combined to get the total nominal rates. The total nominal rates
were then multiplied by the school district average appraisal ratio to derive "total adjusted
rates," allowing for the equitable comparison of tax rates and burdens. The taxing areas
are ranked from highest to lowest total adjusted rate.
The taxing area encompassing the city of Robstown and Robstown ISD (Nueces County)
has the highest total adjusted rate at $3.61 per $100 value. Robstown also has the highest
nominal rate of $3.53. The taxing area of Gun Barrel City and Malakoff ISD (Henderson
County) is the low with a total adjusted rate of $1.58, largely because Gun Barrel City
does not levy a property tax. The taxing area encompassing Glen Rose and Glen Rose
ISD has the lowest nominal rate at $1.59. The average total nominal rate of $2.54 is
modestly above the total adjusted rate, $2.52, indicating that average appraisal ratios are
slightly lower than 100% of market value. Among the school districts listed, average
appraisal ratios -- with a mean of 99.0707 -- range from a low of .8826 in Seymour ISD
(Baylor County) to a high of 1.1479 in Spur ISD (Dickens County).
Appendix A Summary
High
Low
$1.5850
$3.5332
Total Nominal Rate
$1.5787
$3.6097
Total Adjusted Rate
0.8826
1.1479
ISD Average Appraisal Ratio
Average
$2.5411
$2.5167
99.0707
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appendix B
1995 Property Tax Rates per $100 Value (Alphabetical by City)
Appendix B lists the tax rates in the 570 taxing areas and ranks the total adjusted rates.
The tax rates adopted by the city, school district, junior college, hospital, and other
special districts were combined to get the total nominal rates. The total nominal rates
were then multiplied by the school district average appraisal ratio to derive "total adjusted
rates," allowing for the equitable comparison of tax rates and burdens. The taxing areas
are sorted alphabetically by city.
The taxing area encompassing the city of Robstown and Robstown ISD (Nueces County)
has the highest total adjusted rate at $3.61 per $100 value. Robstown also has the highest
nominal rate at $3.53. The taxing area of Gun Barrel City and Malakoff ISD (Henderson
County) is the low with a total adjusted rate of $1.58, largely because Gun Barrel City
does not levy a property tax. The taxing area encompassing Glen Rose and Glen Rose
ISD has the lowest nominal rate at $1.59. The average total nominal rate of $2.54 is
modestly above the total adjusted rate, $2.52, indicating that average appraisal ratios are
slightly lower than 100% of market value. Among the school districts listed, average
appraisal ratios -- with a mean of 99.0707 -- range from a low of .8826 in Seymour ISD
(Baylor County) to a high of 1.1479 in Spur ISD (Dickens County).
Summary Appendix B
Low
$1.5850
Total Nominal Rate
$1.5787
Total Adjusted Rate
0.8826
ISD Average Appraisal Ratio
High
$3.5332
$3.6097
1.1479
Average
$2.5411
$2.5167
99.0707
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appendix C
1995 Property Tax Burden on $100,000 Property (By City)
Appendix C displays the taxes that would be due in each taxing area on various types of
property valued at $100,000. Tax burdens and rankings are presented for residential
homestead, commercial real, industrial real, oil and gas, and utility properties. The data
are sorted alphabetically by city. The residential homestead numbers take into account
the school district, city and county local option and state mandated homestead
exemptions that are granted to all homeowners. Adjustments were not made to account
for exemptions that are available only to special groups of taxpayers, such as the 65 and
over and veterans homestead exemptions or abatements and freeport exemptions. In the
tax burden calculations, nominal tax rates were adjusted by the appraisal ratio applicable
to each specific type of property in the named school district.
The taxing area encompassing the city of Robstown and Robstown ISD, (Nueces County)
has the highest residential levy at $3,494 and industrial levy at $3,533. The area of Van
Horn and Culberson ISD (Culberson County) has the highest commercial real levy at
$3,572. Eldorado and Schleicher ISD (Schleicher County) has the highest Oil and Gas
levy of $3,640 and utility tax burden at $3,671. The area that encompasses Glen Rose and
Glen Rose ISD (Somervell County) has the lowest tax levy in three categories:
Residential homestead - $1,273, Oil & Gas - $1,585 and Utilities - $1,595. Buffalo and
Buffalo ISD (Leon County) and Gun Barrel City and Malakoff ISD (Henderson County)
have the lowest burdens in commercial real and industrial tax levies, respectively. There
was no oil, gas & mineral property in 158 of the taxing areas, and 22 did not have
industrial real property.
Summary Appendix C (Taxes on $100,000 Property Value)
Low
High
Average
$1,273
$3,494
$2,255
Residential Homestead
$1,305
$3,572
$2,514
Commercial Real
$1,606
$3,533
$2,551
Industrial Real
$1,585
$3,640
$2,560
Oil, Gas & Minerals
$1,595
$3,671
$2,687
Utilities
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appendix D
1995 School District Property Tax Rates per $100 Value and Appraisal Ratios (By School District)
Appendix D lists for each school district the nominal M & O, I & S, and total tax rates
and the appraisal ratios for each category of property. The data are sorted alphabetically
by school district.
The average school district total rate for 1995 was almost $1.37 per $100 value. Once
again, Huffman ISD (Harris County) had the highest total tax rate ($1.97), despite its
$0.06 tax reduction from the prior year. Palo Pinto ISD (Palo Pinto County) had the
lowest rate at $0.84, $0.38 above the rate of last year's low. Spring Branch ISD had the
highest M&O rate at 1.62 - almost three times that of the lowest rate, .59, for Tornillo
ISD (El Paso County). Upwards of 388 school districts were without an I&S rate. The
average I&S rate listed below excludes these districts. Average appraisal ratios among all
school districts ranged from 82% in Spurger ISD (Tyler County) to 127% in San Vicente
ISD (Brewster County). Appraisal ratios for residential Homestead property ranged from
a high of 1.3517 in Lueders-Avoca, to a low of .7091 in Ft. Hancock (Hopkins County).
Commercial real property ratios ranged from .6783 in Sweetwater ISD (Nolan County) to
1.2671 in Plainview ISD (Hale county). Ratios for industrial real property registered
1.0000 across the board because these properties are normally appraised by private firms
and the values are accepted by the Comptroller. A total of 185 districts do not have
industrial real property in their districts. Oil, gas & minerals ratios ranged from .7216 in
Leveretts Chapel ISD (Rusk County) to 1.2814 in Tidehaven ISD (Matagorda County).
There was no oil, gas and minerals property in 186 districts.
Summary Appendix D
Low
High
Average
Tax Rates
Total Tax Rate
$0.8400
$1.9700
$1.3669
M & O Rate
$0.5949
$1.6200
$1.2153
I & S Rate
$0.0061
$0.9574
$0.2420
Appraisal Ratios
All Property
Residential
Commercial Real
Industrial Real
Oil, Gas & Minerals
Utilities
0.8249
0.7091
0.6783
1.0000
0.7216
0.8197
1.2700
1.3517
1.2671
1.0000
1.2814
1.5873
N/A
0.9676
0.9924
1.0000
1.0146
1.0547
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appendix E
1995 County Tax Rates per $100 Value (By Total Rate Rank)
Appendix E lists for each county the Farm to Market (F/M) Flood Control, General Fund,
and Special Road and Bridge property tax rates and ranks the total rates.
Tax rates for the 254 counties in Texas averaged $0.4829 per $100 value. The range of
county tax rates was a low of $0.1590 in Somervell County (site of a nuclear power
plant), to a high of $1.2100 in Jim Hogg County.
Total County Tax Rate
Summary Appendix E
Low
High
$0.1590
$1.2100
Average
$0.4829
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appendix F
1995 County Tax Rates per $100 Value (By County)
Appendix F lists for each county the Farm to Market (F/M) Flood Control, General Fund,
and Special Road and Bridge property tax rates. The data are sorted alphabetically by
county.
Tax rates for the 254 counties in Texas averaged $0.4829 per $100 value. The range of
county tax rates was a low of $0.1590 in Somervell County (site of a nuclear power
plant), to a high of $1.2100 in Jim Hogg County.
Total County Tax Rate
Summary Appendix F
Low
High
$0.1590
$1.2100
Average
$0.4829
Source: Property Tax Division, Comptroller of Public Accounts
Appendix G
Definitions
Miscellaneous
Personal Property is defined in Section 1.04 of the Property Tax Code as all property
that is not real property.
Real Property is defined in Section 1.04 of the Property Tax Code as land,
improvements, mines or quarries, minerals in place, standing timber or an estate or
interest in one of these properties.
Certified School District Values. School district values certified by the Comptroller of
Public Accounts to the Commissioner of Education for use in school finance calculations.
(See also Property Value Study)
Categories of Property
The Comptroller of Public Accounts divides property into 15 categories based on the use
of the property. The categories are as follows:
Category A. Real Property: Residential, single-family. Houses, condominiums
and mobile homes located on land owned by the occupant.
Category B. Real Property: Residential, multi-family. Residential structures
containing two or more dwelling units where individual units are not separately
owned. Apartment buildings and duplexes would fall into this category, but it
does not include hotels or motels.
Category C. Real Property: Vacant Lots. Unimproved land parcels usually
located within or adjacent to cities.
Category D. Real Property: Acreage (Land only). Agricultural and timber land,
recreational land, all land receiving agricultural-use appraisal and large vacant
tracts owned by commercial, industrial or utility taxpayers.
Category E. Real Property: Farm and Ranch Improvements. Residences,
barns, silos and other real property improvements on Category D land, as well as
on land separated from a larger farm or ranch tract to receive a residence
homestead exemption.
Category F1. Real Property: Commercial. Land and improvements devoted to
sales, entertainment or services. Includes office buildings but does not include
utility property.
Category F2. Real Property: Industrial. Manufacturing and processing
facilities. Does not include utility property.
Category G. Real Property: Oil, Gas and Minerals. Producing and nonproducing wells, all other minerals and mineral interests and equipment used to
bring the oil and gas to the surface. Does not include the surface rights.
Category H. Personal Property: Nonbusiness Vehicles. Privately owned
automobiles, motorcycles and light trucks not used to produce income.
Category J. Real and Tangible Personal Property: Utilities. All real and
tangible personal property of railroads, pipelines, electric and gas companies,
telephone companies, water systems, cable TV companies and other utilities.
Category L1. Personal Property:Commercial. All tangible personal property,
including fixtures, equipment and inventory, used by a commercial business to
produce income.
Category L2. Personal Property: Industrial. All tangible personal property,
including fixtures, equipment and inventory, used by an industrial business to
produce income.
Category M. Tangible Personal Property: Other. Taxable personal property
not included in other categories. Includes privately owned aircraft, boats, travel
trailers, motor homes and mobile homes on rented or leased land.
Category N. Intangible Personal Property. Includes all taxable intangible
property not otherwise classified. Includes intangible personal property of
insurance companies and savings and loans and uncertified values in all property
categories.
Category O. Real Property: Inventory. Residential real property inventory held
for sale under Sec. 23.12 of the Property Tax Code. Sec. 23.12 refers to new
homes for sale by a builder that have not previously been occupied as a residence.
Tax Rates
Maintenance and Operations Rate. The "M & O" rate is the portion of a taxing unit's
total tax rate used to generate revenue for school district operations.
Interest and Sinking Fund Rate. The "I & S" rate is the portion of a taxing unit's total
property tax rate that is dedicated to retiring the principal and interest on bonded
indebtedness. This is sometimes referred to as the "debt" rate.
Total Tax Rate. The total tax rate is the sum of the M & O rate and the I & S rate.
Nominal Rate. The actual property tax rate adopted by a taxing jurisdiction, i.e. the rate
that appears on a taxpayer's tax statement.
Total Adjusted Rate. The total nominal rate for a "taxing area" multiplied by the school
district's average appraisal ratio. This calculation results in a rate that can be fairly
compared to that of other taxing jurisdictions because it compensates for variations in the
level of property valuations. For example, if a taxing area's total nominal rate is $2.00,
but the appraisal district appraises property in the area at 95% of market value, the $2.00
rate raises the same amount of revenue as a rate of $1.90 would generate from the same
property if it was valued at 100% of market value. The $2.00 rate is multiplied by 95% to
achieve an adjusted rate of $1.90.
Appraisal Ratios
Property Value Study. Chapter 403, Subchapter M of the Government Code directs the
Comptroller of Public Accounts to "conduct an annual study using comparable sales and
generally accepted auditing and sampling techniques to determine the total value of all
taxable property in each school district. The study shall determine the taxable value of all
property and of each category of property in the district and the productivity value of all
land that qualifies for appraisal on the basis of its productive capacity and for which the
owner has applied for and received a productivity appraisal." In conducting the study, the
Comptroller reviews the appraisal standards, procedures, and methodology used by each
appraisal district to determine the taxable value of property in each school district. The
review must test the validity of the taxable values assigned to each category of property
by the appraisal district using samples selected through generally accepted sampling
techniques and according to generally accepted standard valuation, statistical compilation
and analysis techniques. If the Comptroller finds that the appraisal district used generally
accepted appraisal standards and practices to determine the value in a particular category
of property and that assigned values are valid, the appraisal roll value of that category of
property is presumed to represent taxable value. If the Comptroller does not find that
assigned values are valid, the Comptroller estimates the taxable value of that category of
property using generally accepted standard valuation, statistical compilation, and analysis
techniques. The comparison of these two values - local and Comptroller-assigned determines the appraisal ratio for that category of property. The Comptroller certifies his
findings of value to the Commissioner of Education for use in distributing state school
aid. That certified value is presumed to reflect market value when calculating appraisal
ratios.
ISD Average Appraisal Ratio. The total market value of all property within a school
district as determined by the county appraisal district, divided by the Comptroller of
Public Accounts estimate of such value as contained in the annual Property Value Study.
This calculation results in a ratio which illustrates how close to market value the local
appraisal district appraises the property in the district.
Appraisal Ratios by Categories. The total market value of all property within a specific
category as determined by the county appraisal district divided by the Comptroller of
Public Accounts estimate of such value as contained in the annual Property Value Study.
This calculation results in a ratio which illustrates how close to market value the local
appraisal district appraises the property in each category.
Median Appraisal Ratio. The Comptroller samples properties in the different categories
and estimates values for each sample property. The ratios of local value to Comptroller
value for each sample property are then sorted. The median appraisal ratio is the midpoint on the list.