Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 39
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-1-106 (2026)

Partial interests not subject to separate tax

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

For purposes of property taxation, it shall make no difference that the use, possession, or ownership of any taxable property is qualified, limited, not the subject of alienation, or the subject of levy or distraint separately from the particular tax derivable therefrom. Severed mineral interests shall also be taxed.

Source: L. 64: R&RE, p. 677, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 137-1-6. L. 73: p. 1430, § 2. L. 96: Entire section amended, p. 1850, § 2, effective June 5. L. 2002: Entire section amended, p. 1008, § 2, effective August 7.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: Rare Air Ltd. v. Prop, 2019 COA 134 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rare Air Ltd. v. Prop, 2019 COA 134 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “The division further concludes that, in the absence of multiple taxpayers with interests in a single property, the unit rule established by section 39-1-106, C.R.S. 2018, has no application.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Vail Assocs., Inc., 19 P.3d 1263 (Colo. 2001). · cites it 5× “At the same time, the legislature amended section 39-1-106: 12 For purposes of property taxation, it shall make no difference that the use, possession, or ownership of any taxable property is qualified, limited, not the subject of alienation, or the subject of levy or dis-traint…”
City & Cnty. of Denver v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 848 P.2d 355 (Colo. 1993). · cites it 7× “The court of appeals held that section 39-1-106, 16B C.R.S. (1982), establishes “a unit rule for the assessment of property; rather than requiring assessment of the various interests in the property .”
Cantina Grill, JV v. City & Cnty. of Denver Cnty. Bd. of Equalization Ex Rel. Kennedy, 2015 CO 15 (Colo. 2015). · cites it 6× “5 This rule is established by section 39-1-106, C.R.S. (2014), which provides that “[f]or purposes of property taxation, it shall make no difference that the use, possession, or ownership of any taxable property is qualified, limited, not the subject of alienation, or the…”
Vail Assocs., Inc. v. Eagle Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 983 P.2d 49 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 8× “The provisions of section 39-1-102(14)(a) and (14)(c) and section 39-1-106 do not direct the taxation of possessory interests in real property.”
Mesa Verde Co. v. Montezuma Cnty. Bd. of Equalization, 898 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1995). · cites it 4× “” Relying upon Article X, Section 10, of the Colorado Constitution, 5 and section 39-1-106, 16B C.R.S. (1994), 6 the *5 County contends that the General Assembly enacted section 39-3-135 in order to allow the taxation of a private company with a possessory interest in…”
Roaring Fork Club, LLC v. Pitkin Cnty. Bd. of Equalization, 342 P.3d 467 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “But they disagree about a particular aspect of the application of the income approach: Should the value of sold memberships be used in the calculation of the actual value of the club's property for property tax purposes? 130 This question implicates the "unit assessment rule"…”
United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). “USTS’s rights in the circuits in question have a value as a part of USTS’s operating property and plant separate and apart from the value of the lessor’s reversionary interests in those circuits.”
Vill. at Treehouse, Inc. v. Prop. Tax Adm'r, 321 P.3d 624 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “The rule is codified in section 39-1-106, which states, in pertinent part: For purposes of property taxation, it shall make no difference that the use, possession, or ownership of any taxable property is qualified, limited, not the subject of alienation, or the subject of levy…”
Bd. of Assessment Appeals v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 829 P.2d 1319 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “Additionally, § 39-1-106, C.R.S. (1982 Repl.Yol. 16B), provides: “For purposes of property taxation, it shall make no difference that the use, possession, or ownership of any taxable property is qualified, limited, not the subject of alienation, or the subject of levy or…”
Elliott v. Notch Mountain Corp., 881 P.2d 434 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 3× “Section 39-1-106, C.R.S. (1982 Repl.Vol. 16B); §§ 39-1-104(4), 39-1-104.”
Sheltair v. Jefferson Cnty. (Colo. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 3× “14 ¶ 34 The unit assessment rule comes from section 39-1-106, C.R.S. 2025: “For purposes of property taxation, it shall make no difference that the use, possession, or ownership of any taxable property is qualified, limited, not the subject of alienation, or the subject of levy…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.