N.M. Stat. § 7-38-7 (2026)

All property subject to valuation for property taxation purposes shall be valued as of
January 1 of each tax year, except that livestock shall be valued as of the date and in
the manner prescribed under Section 7-36-21 NMSA 1978 and tangible personal
property of construction contractors shall be valued as of the date and in the manner
prescribed under Section 1 [7-38-7.1 NMSA 1978] of this act.

History: 1953 Comp., § 72-31-7, enacted by Laws 1973, ch. 258, § 47; 1997, ch. 68, §
2.

                                    ANNOTATIONS

Compiler's notes. — The phrase "this act" at the end of the section refers to Laws
1997, ch. 68, which amended this section.

The 1997 amendment, effective June 20, 1997, substituted "7-36-21" and the language
following it for "72-29-10 NMSA 1953" at the end of the section.

Appropriate time period to establish exemption status. — The prior calendar year is
the appropriate time period upon which to base a property’s exemption status, and
January 1 is the appropriate “cutoff date” under Article VIII, Section 3 of the New Mexico
Constitution. CAVU Co. v. Martinez, 2014-NMSC-029, aff'g in part, rev'g in part 2013-
NMCA-050, 302 P.3d 126.

Evidence of the use of property on the valuation date. — The valuation date of
January 1 sets a cut-off date to avoid reclassification of property throughout the tax
year. It does not specify the date on which the property’s use defines its status for the
remainder of the year and does not limit the evidence that can be considered in
determining the status of property to the property’s use on January 1. Property does not
have to be in active use for exempt purposes on January 1 in order for an exemption to
apply and evidence of the prior use of the property should be considered. CAVU Co. v.
Martinez, 2013-NMCA-050, 302 P.3d 126, cert. granted, 2013-NMCERT-004.

Where the taxpayer’s property was used as a school until May 2008, the property
ceased to be used actively as a school after May, 2008 and was not used actively as a
school again until August 2010 when the fall semester began; the property was not
used for educational purposes on January 1, 2010; and the district court held that
January 1 is the point at which the status of property is determined for purposes of
qualifying for an exemption from taxation and that the taxpayer’s property was not
exempt for the 2010 tax year because the property was not used for educational
purposes on January 1, 2010, the district court erred in interpreting Section 7-38-7
NMSA 1978 too narrowly and should have considered the use of the property prior to
January 1, 2010. CAVU Co. v. Martinez, 2013-NMCA-050, 302 P.3d 126, cert. granted,
2013-NMCERT-004.

Exclusive reliance on evidence of prior year comparable sales was reasonable. —
With respect to comparable sales, the legislature intended assessors and protests
boards to consider only data available on January 1 of the tax year of the valuation
notice. AMREP Sw., Inc. v. Sandoval Cnty. Assessor, 2012-NMCA-082, 284 P.3d 1118.

Where the county valuation protests board refused to consider the taxpayer’s
comparable 2009 sales evidence and relied exclusively on comparable 2008 sales for
the valuation of the taxpayer’s property for the 2009 tax year based on the board’s
interpretation of statutory and administrative code provisions that required property to
be valued using only data available on January 1, 2009, the board’s interpretation of the
statutory and administrative code provisions was reasonable. AMREP Sw., Inc. v.
Sandoval Cnty. Assessor, 2012-NMCA-082, 284 P.3d 1118.

Past or future value not to serve as basis. — What the fair market value of a tract
may have been in the past or speculation as to what it might be in the future cannot
serve as the basis for valuation. Petition of Kinscherff, 1976-NMCA-097, 89 N.M. 669,
556 P.2d 355, cert. denied, 90 N.M. 8, 558 P.2d 620; Bakel v. Bernalillo Cnty. Assessor,
1980-NMCA-173, 95 N.M. 723, 625 P.2d 1240.

Tax liability whether or not property evaluation done on time. — When property is
evaluated in accordance with the law, the taxpayer is liable for payment, whether or not
the evaluation is done on time, just so long as the value determined reflects the value
as of January 1st of the tax year. Hansman v. Bernalillo Cnty. Assessor, 1980-NMCA-
088, 95 N.M. 697, 625 P.2d 1214.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 72 Am. Jur. 2d State and Local
Taxation § 753.

Sale price of real property as evidence in determining value for tax assessment
purpose, 89 A.L.R.3d 1126.
84 C.J.S. Taxation §§ 436, 437.