Use-Value Assessment Common Questions

  1. If the zoning requires a minimum parcel size of 5 acres to split off as a residential parcel, why can't I use that acreage criterion as the land "necessary for the location & convenience" of the agricultural improvements, especially when the agricultural buildings include a residence?
  2. A 40-acre parcel classed as Agricultural (Class 4) in 2013 sold during that year. The property was re-zoned residential and a subdivision approval was granted before January 1, 2014. As of June 2014, the parcel was covered with last year's stubble. Do the earlier activities indicating a future use change and the lack of use in agricultural meet the rule's criteria of "incompatible with agricultural use"?
  3. May a municipality pass an ordinance against using land for agricultural purposes, which in effect would disallow use value assessment of such land?
  4. Should land that is being actively used for agricultural purposes, in violation of a local ordinance prohibiting agricultural use, still be classified as agricultural land?
  5. Is land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) considered an agricultural use?
  6. Can land enrolled in Conservation Security Program (CSP) and other programs not specifically noted in the administrative rule Chapter Tax 18.05 be considered an agricultural use?
  7. When are "forest" lands properly classified as pasture land?
  8. Are small parcels of land eligible for agricultural classification?
  9. What is the proper classification for each of the following parcels?
  10. How are site acres of Other (Class 7) determined? How does a property owner appeal the Assessor's determination of the size of the farm site?
  11. How is the classification of Other (Class 7) Improvements determined? What factors are used to make this determination? Is it proper to classify a set of improvements by listing the agricultural outbuildings as Other (Class 7) and the residence as Residential (Class 1)?
  12. How are the site acres for Other (Class 7) lands to be valued? Should they be valued as one or two acre parcels? Should the fact that the site is part of a larger parcel be considered?
  13. How should the Assessor classify tillable land where the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has purchased an easement that does not allow tilling or grazing the land?
  14. How is a 20-acre parcel that has a 1-acre building site and 19-acres of grazing area for a horse classified? Are the 19-acres considered an agricultural use?
  15. A person bought a parcel of agricultural and forest land during 2013 for substantially more than the 2013 assessment. The municipality was revalued in 2014. For 2014, the Assessor assessed the agricultural land using the published 2013 use-values. The remaining forest land was assessed using the 2013 selling price minus the 2014 use-value of the agricultural lands. Was this correct?
  16. Is there a Conversion Charge for converting agricultural land to another use?
  17. Can the Board of Review members view the property in person determine whether a piece of property is used for pasture, rather than woods?
  18. Is maple syrup gathering considered an agricultural activity, and if so, how is such land to be assessed?
  19. Are licensed game farms considered an agricultural use?
  20. Is aquaculture an agricultural use?
  21. Is cranberry production an agricultural use?
  22. Is nursery stock production an agricultural use?
  23. How are use values determined?
  24. How can the assessor discover whether acreage is enrolled in any program eligible for use value assessment if the land is not currently being used for agriculture?
  25. How should the phrase "production season" as specified in Chapter Tax 18.06(1) be applied in determination eligibility for agricultural use valuation?

  1. If the zoning requires a minimum parcel size of 5 acres to split off as a residential parcel, why can't I use that acreage criterion as the land "necessary for the location & convenience" of the agricultural improvements, especially when the agricultural buildings include a residence?

    Even though the minimum residential parcel size may be 5 acres, if all or part of the land is primarily devoted to a qualifying agricultural use under Chapter Tax 18, the qualifying acreage would be classified as agricultural. Actual acreage devoted to the farm set (collection of agricultural buildings) including the residence should be determined independently for each parcel. Use of the acreage, not zoning, is the determining factor.

  2. A 40-acre parcel classed as Agricultural (Class 4) in 2013 sold during that year. The property was re-zoned residential and a subdivision approval was granted before January 1, 2014. As of June 2014, the parcel was covered with last year's stubble. Do the earlier activities indicating a future use change and the lack of use in agricultural meet the rule's criteria of "incompatible with agricultural use"?

    This parcel would not become incompatible with agricultural use based solely upon the legal changes indicated (rezoning and subdivision approval). Even the presence of survey stakes may not curtail a farmer from producing and harvesting an agricultural crop. Since the land was in an agricultural use in the production season prior to the January 1, 2014 assessment date, it's classification in the January 1, 2014 assessment roll would be agricultural.

  3. May a municipality pass an ordinance against using land for agricultural purposes, which in effect would disallow use value assessment of such land?

    A municipality may enact such an ordinance, based on reasonable conditions. The legality of such an ordinance, and administration of it, would be on a case by case basis. If land was devoted primarily to a qualifying agricultural use under Tax 18.05(1) during the prior production season and was compatible with agricultural use on January 1 of the current assessment year, even if in violation of ordinance, easement, or contract, the land must be classified as ag land for the current assessment year. The ag classification would apply until such time that the land is no longer devoted primarily to a qualifying agricultural use.

  4. Should land that is being actively used for agricultural purposes, in violation of a local ordinance prohibiting agricultural use, still be classified as agricultural land?

    Yes. State statutes supersede local ordinances, and therefore, this land would require classification as agricultural land, because it meets the definition of agricultural land under Chapter Tax 18. Enforcement of the ordinance would be a municipal decision; once the land is no longer being used for agricultural purposes, either through enforcement of the ordinance or the land owner's choice, the classification should be changed from agricultural to another classification. If land was devoted primarily to a qualifying agricultural use under Tax 18.05(1) during the prior production season and was compatible with agricultural use on January 1 of the current assessment year, even if in violation of ordinance, easement, or contract, the land must be classified as ag land for the current assessment year. The ag classification would apply until such time that the land is no longer devoted primarily to a qualifying agricultural use.

  5. Is land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) considered an agricultural use?

    Chapter Tax 18.05(1) lists enrollment in the Conservation Reserve Program as an agricultural use. However, land removed from the CRP program may now be incompatible with agricultural use (i.e. wooded) and may need to be reclassified and valued at its appropriate assessed value according to WI Statutes. For further information regarding what programs qualify for use-value assessment, see Program and Eligibility for Use-Value Assessment.

  6. Can land enrolled in Conservation Security Program (CSP) and other programs not specifically noted in the administrative rule Chapter Tax 18.05 be considered an agricultural use?

    Lands such as CSP land and other program lands designated with a NO on the report Program and Eligibility for Use-Value Assessment do not qualify as an agricultural use on the basis of the program enrollment. Therefore, the Assessor must review the use of the land. If land was devoted primarily to an agricultural use under Tax 18.05(1) paragraphs (a), (b), or (c) in the prior production season and is not in a use incompatible with agriculture on the assessment date, then it may qualify for agricultural classification and use-value assessment. In essence, the land might qualify for use-value assessment, but it would be because of how it was used, NOT because of the program it is in.

  7. When are "forest" lands properly classified as pasture land?

    Pastured woods devoted primarily to agricultural use (keeping, grazing, or feeding livestock) qualifies for use value. Active grazing keeps the undergrowth in check. A few paths through the wooded area are not convincing evidence that the wooded area is being pastured. The land should be pastured daily or on a reasonably periodic basis. Fencing must adequately prevent animals from straying. Land with non-existent or severely limited foliage or plant growth would not be considered pasture. The best source for definitions of all classes of land is the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual (WPAM). Pasture is defined in Chapter 11 and Forest land is defined in Chapter 12. Information can also be found at: Agricultural Assessment Guide for Wisconsin Property Owners

  8. Are small parcels of land eligible for agricultural classification?

    Size is not relevant when determining if a parcel of land should be classified agricultural. A 5-acre apple orchard or a small acreage vegetable field can be considered devoted primarily to agricultural use if there is a valid economic activity occurring. Whether small or large, the land must be devoted primarily to an agricultural use as defined in Tax 18.05(1) during the production season prior to the assessment date of January 1 and not in a use incompatible with agricultural use on January 1 to be eligible for agricultural classification. It is important to note that the Administrative Rule specifies the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) as the standard for determining if land is being used for agricultural purposes.

    When classifying land based on its use, the Assessor should not be considering the size of typical operating farms as he or she may be accustomed to thinking of them. The Assessor is to classify the land according to the acres used for agricultural purposes, considering the use of each parcel individually.

  9. What is the proper classification for each of the following parcels?

    Example: A farmer has a 120 acre farm operation with qualifying agricultural uses under Chapter Tax 18. A portion of the operation is experiencing a change in use as illustrated in the diagram below. Specifically, the farmland is being developed into a residential subdivision with several parcels that are approximately 5 acres. The subdivision is located in an area that shows residential growth. Utilities are available at the parcel line. Parcel sizes range from one to ten acres. Some of the parcels have qualifying agricultural uses; others have a mixture of qualifying agricultural uses and woods; others have a mixture of land uses.

    Click on the appropriate parcel letter in the diagram below to go to its corresponding description.

    Parcel class Parcel A Parcel B Parcel E Parcel F Parcel G Parcel H Parcel I Parcel C

    Parcel A – is a 5 acre parcel, partially wooded, with 2 acres devoted to crop production. The crop was harvested last fall.

    This parcel should be classified as part agricultural (the 2 acres) and part residential. The agricultural land is part of the aforementioned farm operation and was used for a qualifying activity under Chapter Tax 18 in the previous growing year. The woods land is part of the small parcel, which the owner could build on, and is located in an area of typical five acre parcel sizes.

    Parcel B – is located next to parcel A. It has a 2 acre field, as an extension of the field in parcel A. The balance of the three acres are fallow tillable.

    This parcel should be classified as part agricultural and part residential. The agricultural land is part of the aforementioned farm operation, and produces value from the land for the land owner. The fallow land is part of a residential subdivision where the residential infrastructure is in place and the construction of a residence is imminent. In addition, the land is advertised for sale as residential and is a typical residential parcel size for the community.

    Parcel C – is located next to parcel B. It has a residence on part of it with about three acres of trees and an acre of agricultural land (part of the same fields and operation as above).

    This parcel should be classified as one acre of agricultural land. The balance should all be classified as residential, as the acre around the residence is used in support of the residential nature, and the trees are also in support of the residential use of the parcel.

    Parcel D – is mostly wooded, but has 1 acre of fallow ground, and a residence.

    This parcel should be classified as residential. There is no agricultural activity. The fallow land is part of a residential subdivision where the residential infrastructure is in place and the construction of a residence is imminent. In addition, the land is advertised for sale as residential and is a typical residential parcel size for the community.

    Parcel E – is adjacent to parcel D, and has a 2 acre fallow field, with three acres of wooded land.

    This entire parcel should be classified as residential. There is no qualifying agricultural activity on the parcel. The land is part of a residential subdivision where the residential infrastructure is in place and the construction of a residence is imminent. In addition, the land is advertised for sale as residential and is a typical residential parcel size for the community.

    Parcel F - is a 5 acre parcel; all agricultural land, farmed last year as part of the aforementioned farm operation; with no building on the parcel as of the assessment date.

    The entire parcel should be classified as agricultural, with use value assessment. The land's primary use is a qualifying crop activity and is not in a use that is incompatible with agricultural use.

    Parcel G – is a 5 acre parcel adjacent to the above entirely agricultural parcel. It is covered with trees.

    This parcel should be classified as residential. The land is part of a residential subdivision where the residential infrastructure is in place and the construction of a residence is imminent. In addition, the land is advertised for sale as residential and is a typical residential parcel size for the community.

    Parcel H - is an all wooded parcel next to parcel G, and adjacent to parcel I, which is fallow.

    This parcel should be classified as residential. The land is part of a residential subdivision where the residential infrastructure is in place and the construction of a residence is imminent. In addition, the land is advertised for sale as residential and is a typical residential parcel size for the community.

    Parcel I - is a fallow parcel, adjacent to the wooded parcel above.

    This parcel should be classified as residential. The land is part of a residential subdivision where the residential infrastructure is in place and the construction of a residence is imminent. In addition, the land is advertised for sale as residential and is a typical residential parcel size for the community.

  10. How are site acres of Other (Class 7) determined? How does a property owner appeal the Assessor's determination of the size of the farm site?

    The statutes provide that the land necessary for the location and convenience of the farm home and farm buildings is to be classified as Other (Class 7). To determine the amount of land to be entered into this class, the Assessor should use aerial photographs and scale the area used for the location and convenience of the buildings. If the property owner has a different opinion of the site acres, credible supporting evidence should be brought to the Assessor and, if needed, to the Board of Review. The evidence could include a certified survey map, a newer air photo, or other information that would show the necessary land area. See Chapter 11 of the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual for an example of how to determine homesite acreage.

  11. How is the classification of Other (Class 7) Improvements determined? What factors are used to make this determination? Is it proper to classify a set of improvements by listing the agricultural outbuildings as Other (Class 7) and the residence as Residential (Class 1)?

    Generally, improvements are to be classified as Other (Class 7) when the predominant use of the buildings is agricultural. Factors such as the current use, potential use, number and significance of outbuildings, parcel size, and the nature of the agricultural buildings in support of the farm will aid the Assessor in making this determination. Assessors should have a single class for each set of buildings based upon the predominant use of the entire set rather than splitting classifications of building sets. However, sec. 70.32(2)(c) 1m, Wis. Stats., was amended, effective with assessments made for January 1, 2003, to allow the Assessor to classify some typical residential building sets as "other", if the residence is used for the farm operator's spouse, children, parents, or grandparents. It is the Department of Revenue position that these residences must be located on land that is part of the farm operator's farm operation.

  12. How are the site acres for Other (Class 7) lands to be valued? Should they be valued as one or two acre parcels? Should the fact that the site is part of a larger parcel be considered?

    Lands necessary for the location and convenience of buildings should be valued at their contributory market value adjusted to the appropriate level of assessment of all other property in the municipality. Each improved agricultural site needs to be analyzed relative to the amount of acres needed for the location and convenience of the buildings. Some parcels may, due to the number and size of the improvements, need to have site sizes that are larger than others are. Assessors are cautioned not to use the same size for all improved parcels in their municipality. When valuing the site, it is important Assessors value that site considering its contributory market value to the entire parcel.

  13. How should the Assessor classify tillable land where the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has purchased an easement that does not allow tilling or grazing the land?

    If the land is enrolled in a qualifying government program under Chapter Tax 18.05(1), the land should be classified as agricultural land, and placed in the sub-class of agricultural land that it would be in if it were being farmed. For lands that do not qualify, the classification must be changed to another class - most likely Undeveloped (Class 5), Agricultural Forest (Class 5m), or Forest. The land would then be valued at Market Value, considering the effect on value, if any, the easement has on the land. The Market Value would then be adjusted to 50% of full value for Undeveloped and Agricultural Forest. Finally, all classes of land would be adjusted to the average level of assessment for the community. See the Program and Eligibility for Use-Value Assessment publication. If land was devoted primarily to a qualifying agricultural use under Tax 18.05(1) during the prior production season and was compatible with agricultural use on January 1 of the current assessment year, even if in violation of ordinance, easement, or contract, the land must be classified as ag land for the current assessment year. The ag classification would apply until such time that the land is no longer devoted primarily to a qualifying agricultural use.

  14. How is a 20-acre parcel that has a 1-acre building site and 19-acres of grazing area for a horse classified? Are the 19-acres considered an agricultural use?

    Keeping a horse for personal use or boarding horses does not meet the definition of agricultural use under Chapter Tax 18.05. Some uses of land may seem agricultural on the surface, but fail to meet the definitions in Chapter Tax 18.05. By Administrative Rule, the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is the standard to determine if land is being used for agricultural purposes. Training race horses, operating riding stables, rental of saddle horses, and operating a horse race track are considered Arts, Entertaining, and Recreation Industries under the NAICS and do not qualify for use value assessment. Examples of uses that are agricultural can be found in the NAICS Sector and Subsector Groups.

    Raising horses under NAICS Industry 112920 is considered an agricultural use. Establishments that provide foal rearing, health maintenance, controlled feeding and harvesting, for the eventual sale of the animals are considered an agricultural use.

    Renting pasture land to a horse owner might generate income to the owner of the land, but if the land is not being used for an agricultural endeavor, as defined in the previous paragraphs, the land is ineligible for use value assessments.

  15. 15. A person bought a parcel of agricultural and forest land during 2013 for substantially more than the 2013 assessment. The municipality was revalued in 2014. For 2014, the Assessor assessed the agricultural land using the published 2006 use-values. The remaining forest land was assessed using the 2013 selling price minus the 2014 use-value of the agricultural lands. Was this correct?

    No. The sale should have been analyzed in light of the contributory market value of all of the components included in the sale. Once the contributory market value of each component was identified, the non-agricultural components should have been assessed according to the correct statutory provisions. The tillable land and pasture land was properly assessed using the 2014 use-values. The Assessor should not take the selling price minus the use-value to determine the non-agricultural property assessment.

  16. Is there a Conversion Charge for converting agricultural land to another use?

    Property that is no longer used for agricultural purposes, that has benefited from lower property taxes as a result of use-value assessment, may be subject to a Conversion Charge. This occurs when the use of the land is converted to a residential, commercial, manufacturing use. When agricultural land is converted to another use and becomes exempt, the assessor must consider what the classification would be if it were not exempt, to determine of a conversion fee is applicable. A conversion charge does not apply if the land meets the definition of and is classified as undeveloped, agricultural forest, forest or agricultural home site (Other - Class 7). The Assessor makes the determination on the following year's assessment roll. The Conversion Charge varies by the number of acres converted. The more acres converted, the lower the charge amount per acre. Please check the Frequently Asked Questions for Use-Value Conversion Charge for more information.

  17. Can the Board of Review members view the property in person to determine whether a piece of property is used for pasture, rather than woods?

    No. The Board may only act upon sworn oral evidence produced at the hearing. The Board may determine that a change of classification (and subsequent change in value) is appropriate if there is sworn oral testimony before the Board supporting such action. The Board of Review laws (sec. 70.47, Wis. Stats.,) are clear; - the Board may act only on evidence produced under oath at the hearing.

  18. Is maple syrup gathering considered an agricultural activity, and if so, how is such land to be assessed?

    By Administrative Rule, the NAICS identifies the activities that qualify as an agricultural use. Maple sap gathering is a qualifying agricultural use since the NAICS includes maple sap gathering as a crop production activity. Land devoted primarily to maple sap gathering in an area of maple trees that are tapped during the production season prior to the assessment date of January 1 and not in a use incompatible with agricultural use on January 1 is classified as agricultural and assessed at its use-value.

    The operation would need to be considered primarily a for-profit activity with a sale of the product in order to qualify for an agricultural classification. Operations that produce primarily for personal use, neighbors, or family members with minimal sales would not be considered a farming pursuit. However, the use value law does not have a minimum acreage size. Small acreages can qualify for use value if they are primarily used for agricultural purposes. Producers could provide a license, sales receipts, photos of lands being tapped, etc. to describe their operation. A Schedule F could help determine the extent of the product sales although it is not in itself the determining factor.

    If the producer qualifies as a for-profit activity then establishing the number of acres for use value becomes the next issue. Qualifying acres would need to be tapped in the previous production season and be considered primarily engaged in maple sap gathering. Producers that are in the business will generally follow the industry standards for tapping trees. Producers following industry standards will decide to tap maple trees within a mixed species woods when the density of maple trees is sufficient to make the endeavor economically feasible. It has been estimated that in a mixed species stand of woods that a low to average quality tract has 20 tapped trees per acre whereas 30-40 tapped trees per acre was considered a high quality stand in Wisconsin. Acres within a forest that are sufficiently being tapped based upon the industry standards would qualify for use value whereas areas within a forest which have no tapping or minimal tapping would not qualify.

    This effectively disqualifies an activity that is sporadically and minimally tapping large areas and claiming the entire acreage qualifies for agricultural purposes.

  19. Are licensed game farms considered an agricultural use?

    The NAICS classifies game farms, fishing preserves, hunting preserves, and game propagation as Fishing, Hunting and Trapping Industries, which are not agricultural uses. Land used for these purposes would be classified as to its predominate use, possibly commercial or forestry, and valued as a market value class. However, establishments engaged in deer production that provide fawn rearing, health maintenance, controlled feeding and harvesting for the eventual sale of the animals are considered an agricultural use. The fenced land devoted primarily to deer production is classified as agricultural and categorized as grade 1,2,3, or pasture according to the soil type.

  20. Is aquaculture an agricultural use?

    Land devoted primarily to animal aquaculture qualifies as an agricultural use under Chapter Tax 18.05(1)(b) Animal Production. Animal aquaculture establishments use intervention to control and enhance production through methods such as health maintenance, controlled feeding, and protection from predators. Aquaculture fishponds provide an area for the keeping and feeding of fish being raised for market. Fishponds classified as agricultural should be categorized as pasture.

    Not all aquaculture operations fit the definitions of agricultural land. Outdoor concrete raceways and indoor hatchery facilities do not meet the definition in Section 70.32(2)(c)(1) that agricultural land is "land exclusive of buildings and improvements and the land necessary for their location and convenience, that is devoted primarily to agricultural use as defined by rule." Additionally, fishing preserves, recreational uses, and personal uses do not qualify as an agricultural use.

  21. Is cranberry production an agricultural use?

    Yes. Land under a cranberry bed is considered land devoted primarily to an agricultural use. Cranberry land classified as agricultural should be categorized as third grade tillable and adjusted to the local level of assessment.

    Please note, land underneath earthen features (dams, dikes, ditches, inlets, outlets, etc.) surrounding the beds are classified as "Other," Class 7, and assessed at the third grade tillable value, adjusted to the local level of assessment. The earthen features are valued according to a cost less depreciation methodology.

  22. Is nursery stock production an agricultural use?

    Yes. NAICS Industry Classification 111421 defines growing nursery products, nursery stock, shrubbery, bulbs, fruit stock, and sod as crop production, an agricultural use. Furthermore, growing short rotation woody trees with a growth and harvest cycle of 10 years or less for pulp or biomass stock is now included as an agricultural use as provided by Wisconsin statutes. The occasional harvest and sale of a few trees on one's property does not constitute a devotion primarily to agricultural use.

  23. How are use values determined?

    The Department of Revenue annually publishes use values for tillable grades 1, 2, & 3 and pasture lands. The use-values are determined by a multipart formula based on the income approach to value. The income is derived from crop-share agreements (which account for certain farming expenses) and corn harvest data. The values are determined for each municipality in every county. Annual changes to use-values are limited to the annual statewide change in Equalized Values, less the value of agricultural land and new construction.

  24. How can the assessor discover whether acreage is enrolled in any program eligible for use value assessment if the land is not currently being used for agriculture?

    The assessor should call, email or send questionnaires to owners  of questionable parcels, if the owner has not provided the information previously

  25. How should the phrase "production season" as specified in Chapter Tax 18.06(1) be applied in determination eligibility for agricultural use valuation?

    Qualifying agricultural uses include tilled land devoted to crop production, pastured land devoted to livestock production, and specified conservation programs. When reviewing the use, consider the following when evaluating the "production season" as specified in Tax 18.06(1).

    The phase "production season" is generally associated with agricultural activity commencing in the spring and concluding in the fall. This standard is applicable for the majority of agricultural endeavors in Wisconsin. The inclusion of this phrase provides assessors with a standard to employ when determining if the land is "devoted primarily to an agricultural use." Since there are crop production cycles and livestock production practices that may fall outside this standard parameter, it is important that the property owner discuss the endeavor with the municipal assessor. However, these situations are infrequent since the land will also be in an agricultural use during the standard agricultural production season. When land is an agricultural use for a minimal amount of time that is outside the standard production season, the assessor must evaluate the circumstances of each situation to determine the land's primary use. 

For more questions concerning Use-Value Assessment, please contact the appropriate equalization district supervisor listed below.

District Supervisor Counties
MADISON DISTRICT OFFICE (76)
JIM YOUNG
PO BOX 8909 MS 6-301
MADISON WI 53708-8909

Phone #: (608) 266-8184| E-mail
Fax #: (608) 267-1355
Columbia, Crawford, Dane, Dodge, Grant, Green, Green Lake, Iowa, Jefferson, Lafayette, Marquette, Richland, Rock, Sauk, Vernon
MILWAUKEE DISTRICT OFFICE (77)
PAT CHANESKE
819 N 6TH ST RM 530
MILWAUKEE WI 53203

Phone #: (414) 227-4455 | E-mail
Fax #: (414) 227-4071
Fond du Lac, Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Sheboygan, Walworth, Washington, Waukesha
EAU CLAIRE DISTRICT (79)
DIANE FORREST
610 GIBSON ST STE 7
EAU CLAIRE WI 54701

Phone #: (715) 836-2866 | E-mail
Fax #: (715) 836-6690
Barron, Bayfield, Buffalo, Burnett, Chippewa, Douglas, Dunn, Eau Claire, Jackson, La Crosse, Monroe, Pepin, Pierce, Polk, Rusk, St. Croix, Sawyer, Trempealeau, Washburn
WAUSAU DISTRICT OFFICE (80)
ALBERT ROMPORTL
730 N THIRD ST
WAUSAU WI 54403-4700

Phone #: (715) 842-5885 | E-mail
Fax #: (715) 848-1033
Adams, Ashland, Clark, Iron, Juneau, Langlade, Lincoln, Marathon, Oneida, Portage, Price, Taylor, Vilas, Wood
GREEN BAY DISTRICT OFFICE (81)
MARY GAWRYLESKI
200 N JEFFERSON ST STE 126
GREEN BAY WI 54301-5100

Phone #: (920) 448-5195 | E-mail
Fax #: (920) 448-5207
Brown, Calumet, Door, Florence, Forest, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Marinette, Menominee, Oconto, Outagamie, Shawano, Waupaca, Waushara, Winnebago

FOR MORE INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:

WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
Division of State and Local Finance
Equalization Bureau
Mail Stop 6-97
P.O. Box 8971
Madison, WI 53708-8971
Fax: (608) 264-6897

Last updated Febuary 12, 2014