Commission discusses state 183-day rule after homeowner taxed as short-term rental

The Emery County Commission heard a lengthy public discussion about the tax treatment of a property purchased by resident Quinn Montgomery, who said the home he bought in August 2023 was being taxed as a short-term rental rather than as his primary residence.

Montgomery said he paid extra property tax because the previous owner had listed the house on short-term rental platforms. “It’s theft,” Montgomery said during the meeting, calling the extra assessment “outright” and “not right.”

County staff and commissioners explained the county’s valuation process and cited a state residency rule that requires a homeowner to occupy a property for 183 consecutive days before it can be classified and taxed as a primary residence for a given assessment year. “If they live in the home for a hundred and 83 consecutive days out of the year … that is in state code,” a county staff member identified in the meeting as Chris, the county assessor, said. The assessor said staff corrected the property’s classification for the 2024 assessment year after the issue was raised.

Commissioners described the problem as partly created by timing: valuations are based on how a property is used on January 1 of the assessment year, and a late-year purchase can leave a new owner exposed to tax treatment tied to the prior owner’s use. The assessor noted title companies sometimes use the prior year’s tax status when estimating closing costs, which can further confuse buyers.

Commissioners and staff said the county has limited options because the residency rules are set in state statute. One commissioner said the state can enforce uniform valuation changes across counties and that the county’s ability to alter the rule’s effect would be constrained. Commissioners said they have tried administrative fixes when possible and asked title companies to provide a purchaser questionnaire at closing to capture primary-residence intent earlier.

A county staff estimate provided in the meeting put the additional tax Montgomery paid for the affected period at $3,511.83; staff said they corrected the assessment for 2024 so Montgomery would be taxed as a primary resident going forward. No county motion or rebate was made during the meeting; commissioners framed the matter as a state law issue and as one they will monitor.

Speakers who took part in the exchange included Montgomery, the county assessor (Chris), and Commissioners who questioned and explained county practice. Commissioners acknowledged the concern and suggested legislative channels could be pursued if residents want the 183-day rule changed.

The discussion covered procedural remedies the county has pursued—reassessments where immediately possible and outreach to title companies to collect occupant information at closing. Commissioners did not propose local policy changes at the meeting and said any durable change would require action at the state level.

Montgomery’s case was presented as an example of how the county applies the residency and valuation rules; commissioners encouraged residents to contact the assessor’s office promptly if they believe a newly purchased home should be taxed as a primary residence.