This bill amends RCW 84.34.108 and adds a new section. It requires assessors to show current-use classification annually on assessment and tax rolls and to value land under existing RCWs until classification is removed under listed circumstances. The bill creates a department-prepared notice-of-classification-continuance form that a new owner must sign at sale to retain classification; if the form is not signed and required payment is not made, additional tax, interest, and penalty become due at sale and auditors may not accept conveyance instruments without the continuance form or evidence of payment. The bill requires assessors to notify owners in writing within 30 days of removal, to revalue the land to true and fair value as of January 1 of the year of removal, to compute and allocate tax by portion of year, and to allow appeals to the county board of equalization. The measure changes procedures and tax consequences for removal of classification: it specifies when assessors must remove classification, requires granting authorities to assist assessors within 30 days, makes additional tax, interest, and penalty a lien with foreclosure priority under RCW 84.64.050, and sets computation rules for additional tax. Generally the additional tax equals the difference between taxes paid as classified and taxes that would have been paid for the seven prior years, but for removals or withdrawals of classified farm and agricultural land on or after September 1, 2025, the lookback is four years. The bill lists many exceptions under which additional tax, interest, and penalty may not be imposed and defines certain terms (for example, “existing appurtenance” and a definition of “fault” for discovery-of-error exceptions). The new section (Sec. 2) and related text state that a payment referenced in subsection (4) is due from the current government owner unless an exception applies, and permit sale or transfer of classified land to a governmental entity to enable development if the combined acreage removed by development and by the sale/transfer does not exceed 20 percent of classified acres immediately before removal. The bill also states that RCW 82.32.805 and 82.32.808 do not apply to this act. Important text is missing from the provided excerpts: the full text of the new section and parts of subsection (6) (including the remainder of clause (m)) are not included here, and the specific payment mechanism and some referenced procedures are not shown.

If this becomes law, owners and buyers of land already in a current-use tax classification will face a new closing checklist: a state form must be signed by the new owner at sale to keep the classification, or the seller/transferor must pay any additional tax, interest, and penalty at closing and show payment with the real estate excise tax stamp. County auditors will refuse to record transfers without that signature or proof of payment, county treasurers will collect and affix stamps, and county assessors must revalue removed parcels, notify owners quickly, compute any “recapture” tax (generally looking back seven years, but four years for farm and agricultural removals on or after September 1, 2025), and put liens in place if amounts go unpaid. A broad list of exceptions limits when the additional tax applies, and granting authorities must respond to assessor requests within 30 days to help determine continued eligibility. The people and offices most affected are private landowners and prospective buyers of classified land (who may face immediate closing costs or lose classification if they don’t sign), county auditors, treasurers, and assessors (who get new administrative duties and potential transaction delays), and governmental buyers (who may owe payments or be constrained by a 20 percent acreage cap on combined removals tied to development). Important implementation details are missing from the provided text—including some exception language and the exact payment mechanics referenced in subsection (4)—so the full scope of the exemptions and how government-owner payments are calculated is unclear.