Equine industry urges Vermont committee to expand current use definitions to include horse farms

Mindy Hinsdale, a former owner of Steeple Ridge Farm and longtime equine industry volunteer, told the House Agriculture, Food Resiliency, & Forestry Committee that horse farms “nicely fit into the reason the current use program exists” and urged the legislature to change Title 32 taxation law so equine operations receive the same current-use tax treatment as other farms.

Hinsdale said the current statutory definitions exclude many horse farms from property tax relief on farm buildings and acreage even when the operations meet other regulatory farm requirements. She described how large equine infrastructure — indoor arenas, outdoor rings, pastures and paddocks — is necessary to care for animals and to keep land open, and said some parcels now enrolled in current use have been reclassified by current-use staff so that pasture, arenas and farm roads are taxed at higher development values.

Why it matters: Committee members were told losing horse farms reduces open hay and pastureland, affects local vets, farriers and feed stores and could weaken tourism and programs that put children on farms. Advocates said treating equine businesses equitably under current use would preserve agricultural land and rural economic activity.

Hinsdale and Heidi Krantz, former president of the Vermont Horse Council and chair of that council’s Equine Industry Committee, pointed to multiple statutory definitions that treat equine activity as farming in other parts of state law and to IRS guidance used for federal tax treatment. They cited a Vermont Law School memo that identified at least 15 different statutory definitions of “agriculture” across state law and said current use’s definitions diverge from those, producing inconsistent results.

Key details cited by witnesses and the committee: current use generally requires a 25-acre minimum for agricultural land enrollment in many cases; advocates estimate about 250 equine farms statewide that could be in scope for a change; many equine operations depend on mixed revenue streams (boarding, lessons, camps, training) and advocates said the 51% income-from-farming threshold and a requirement that buildings be used exclusively for breeding can exclude typical horse farms. Hinsdale illustrated building-scale concerns by noting indoor arenas can be many thousands of square feet (examples discussed included 60 × 120 feet and a 72 × 176-foot arena) and said taxing agricultural buildings by square footage can make facilities appear overvalued.

Committee response and next steps: Representative Burke (committee member) said she is drafting bill language to update current use definitions and will present it to legislative counsel. Committee staff and members discussed asking the Joint Fiscal Office for a preliminary fiscal estimate and seeking updated data from the Vermont Horse Council, the Center for Rural Studies, and the tax department to understand acreage and revenue trends. Heidi Krantz said an economic study completed in February 2019 is available but noted it is out of date and an updated study would require fundraising.

No formal motion or vote occurred. Committee members instructed staff to post submitted materials the witnesses referenced and to follow up with legislative counsel and JFO about fiscal and data questions.

Hinsdale closed by asking the committee to adopt the title 10 conservation-and-development language that defines the raising, feeding or management of equines — including boarding, training, showing and instruction — as farming when considering changes to the Title 32 current use statute.