Valuation of Land Regulations 1979

The central concept introduced by the regulations is "designated for residential use" , which determines which rate - 3% or 5% - applies to calculate assessed value. This is not simply a matter of whether a house sits on the land. Rather, it depends on the official planning classification of the land under a local planning scheme, redevelopment scheme, or other instrument. The regulation (3(1)) defines "designated for residential use" to include land that is (a) included in a residential zone; (b) included in a residential precinct; (c) included in a rural-residential zone; or (d) included in a rural small-holding zone and subject to conditions or restrictions that, in the view of the Valuer-General, would limit the predominant use of the land to rural living. This last limb gives the Valuer-General a discretionary judgment on whether the restrictions on a rural small-holding zone are severe enough to deem the land "rural living" rather than productive agriculture. That discretion is not defined further. The definitions of the underlying zones come from the Planning and Development Act 2005 for planning zones, and from specific redevelopment acts for precincts. This creates a complex chain of references: the user must look at the local planning scheme to see whether the land is in a residential zone, then check whether conditions limit its use to rural living for the rural small-holding category.

Another core concept is assessed value, which is defined in section 4 of the Act as a percentage of the capital value. The regulations supply that percentage: 3% for residential-designated land, 5% for all other land. The distinction means that commercial, industrial, agricultural, and vacant land typically attract the higher 5% rate, effectively increasing the assessed value used for rating or taxation purposes compared to residential land of the same capital value.

A third concept is the prescribed percentage under the unimproved value definition. The Act defines unimproved value in section 4(1) with several paragraphs. Paragraph (b)(vii) deals with valuing land that has improvements that cannot be ignored; sub-subparagraph (II) allows a prescribed percentage to be applied as an alternative method. Regulation 3A sets that percentage at 50% for the listed local government districts (approximately 60 shires, mostly rural and regional). This means that for those districts, the unimproved value is 50% of something - presumably market value or capital value - though the regulation itself does not specify the base; that detail is in the Act. The effect is a simplified, fixed-rate method for certain rural areas, reducing the need for detailed valuation of improvements.

The valuation roll is also central. Schedule 1 prescribes fees for copies (s. 28(2)(b) of the Act): $178.70 for a copy of the roll, $71.60 for a copy of an addition/deletion/correction/amendment, and extracts (s. 29): $9.90 per entry for an uncertified extract, $21.40 per entry for a certified extract. These fees are updated annually via the Lands Regulations Amendment (Fees and Charges) Regulations series, as shown in the amendment history.

Finally, the term land details is used in regulation 4: an agency or instrumentality of the Crown, a local government, or other public authority must provide "details of any land owned by or vested in it which any other person is entitled to use under an agreement or arrangement". This captures leasehold interests, licences, and similar arrangements that give a private party the right to use public land. The regulation does not specify the type of details required (e.g., location, area, terms of use), leaving that to the Valuer-General's request.

The regulations affect several distinct groups. The most directly affected are landowners in Western Australia, because the assessed value percentage (3% or 5%) directly flows into the calculation of their property rates, land tax, and other statutory charges. For residential landowners, the 3% rate keeps assessed values lower than they would be at 5%, potentially reducing their liability. For commercial, industrial, and agricultural landowners, the 5% rate increases the assessed value relative to capital value, making their liability higher per dollar of capital value than for residential land. This creates an incentive structure: land designated as non-residential (or not falling within the "designated for residential use" definition) carries a heavier valuation burden. For landowners in the 60-odd local government districts listed in regulation 3A, the 50% unimproved value rate applies. Those are overwhelmingly rural and regional shires such as Albany, Busselton, Esperance, Geraldton-Greenough, York, and many smaller inland shires. Their landowners get a fixed 50% ratio for unimproved value calculations, which may simplify valuation but might not reflect true market conditions.

Crown agencies, instrumentalities, local governments, and other public authorities are affected by regulation 4: they must, upon request from the Valuer-General, furnish details of land they own or that is vested in them that is used by another person under an agreement or arrangement. This imposes a compliance obligation on entities such as the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage, Water Corporation, Main Roads, local councils, and others. They must maintain records of such land and be able to respond to requests promptly.

The Valuer-General is the primary administrator. The regulations give the Valuer-General the power to request information (regulation 4) and the discretion to decide whether conditions on rural small-holding zones limit predominant use to rural living (regulation 3(1) definition). The Valuer-General also sets the valuation roll and charges the prescribed fees for copies and extracts.

Private individuals or businesses seeking information from the valuation roll are affected by the fee schedule. They pay $178.70 for a full copy, $71.60 for a copy of an amendment, $9.90 per entry for an uncertified extract, or $21.40 per entry for a certified extract. These fees are not trivial for multiple entries or frequent access, potentially limiting public access to valuation data for smaller users.

Planning authorities are indirectly affected because the definition of "designated for residential use" depends on planning zones and precincts they establish. Their zoning decisions now have a direct impact on the assessed value of land, which in turn affects rates revenue and landowner behaviour. For example, a local council that zones an area as rural small-holding may trigger the Valuer-General's rural-living discretion, potentially lowering the assessed value rate from 5% to 3%, reducing rates income for that land.

The regulations create one explicit duty and several rights. The duty is found in regulation 4: "An agency or instrumentality of the Crown, or a local government or any other public authority shall upon request made by the Valuer-General furnish to the Valuer-General details of any land owned by or vested in it which any other person is entitled to use under an agreement or arrangement with it." This is a mandatory obligation. The duty is triggered only upon request by the Valuer-General; it is not an ongoing reporting requirement. The details to be furnished are not specified in the regulations, leaving scope for the Valuer-General to decide what is needed. The duty applies to any entity that qualifies as an agency or instrumentality of the Crown, local government, or other public authority. It covers land owned directly by the entity as well as land vested in it (e.g., land held on trust for a public purpose). Crucially, it only covers land that another person is entitled to use under an agreement or arrangement. This would include leaseholds, licences, occupancy agreements, or other permissions. Purely vacant public land with no user agreement would not fall within the duty. The purpose is presumably to ensure the Valuer-General can determine the interests affecting public land for valuation purposes, such as when valuing the reversionary interest or the lessor's interest. There is no penalty specified in the regulations for failure to comply; enforcement would need to come from the Act or general law.

In terms of rights, the regulations do not create new substantive rights for private parties. However, they implicitly recognise the right of any person to access the valuation roll, because the fees in Schedule 1 are for copies and extracts "pursuant to s. 28(2)(b) of the Act" and "pursuant to s. 29 of the Act". Those sections of the Act presumably grant a right to inspect or obtain copies of the roll, with the regulations setting the cost. Thus, a person has the right to obtain a copy or extract upon paying the prescribed fee. The fee amounts are set at levels that presumably recover costs but are not prohibitive for most users. The right to a certified extract (fee $21.40 per entry) may be relevant for legal proceedings where official evidence of valuation is needed.

Additionally, landowners have the right to have their land valued using the correct percentage. The regulations give landowners a clear rule: if their land is "designated for residential use", it must be valued at 3% of capital value; otherwise at 5%. The definition of "designated for residential use" is objective for zones (residential zone, residential precinct, rural-residential zone) but incorporates subjective discretion for rural small-holding zones, where the Valuer-General's view on whether conditions limit predominant use to rural living is decisive. This introduces an element of administrative discretion that landowners may challenge, but the regulations do not provide a mechanism; the Act's objection and appeal provisions would apply.

The regulations themselves contain no penalty provisions. They do not set fines, imprisonment, or other sanctions for non-compliance. This is typical for subordinate legislation that deals with definitions and fees. The enforcement mechanisms for the duty under regulation 4 would be found in the Valuation of Land Act 1978, which is not reproduced here. It is common for such Acts to make it an offence to fail to provide information required under the regulations, or to impose a penalty for obstruction. Similarly, the Act likely provides for penalties for tampering with the valuation roll or providing false information. The fee schedule is enforceable: if a person refuses to pay the fee, the Valuer-General is not obliged (and likely not entitled) to provide the copy or extract. There is no debt or criminal sanction for non-payment; the service is simply withheld.

The regulations do not create any enforcement role for the police or any inspectorate. The Valuer-General is the main administrator. If a landowner believes the wrong percentage was applied, they would have recourse under the Act's objection and appeal procedures. The regulation 3(1) definition gives the Valuer-General a discretionary power regarding rural small-holding zones, and that discretion could be subject to judicial review if exercised unreasonably.

Given the lack of explicit penalties in the regulations, the user must look to the Act. The compilation notes show that the regulations have been frequently amended to update fees, but no penalty-creating amendments are seen. The deletion of regulation 5 and 7 (which are missing from the current text) might have removed some minor provisions, but no penalties. Therefore, the regulations operate as a set of administrative rules with compliance largely assured by the importance of the valuation roll to the rating and taxation system; entities subject to regulation 4 would generally comply to maintain good relations with the Valuer-General and avoid potential sanctions under the Act.

The regulations explicitly cross-reference several other statutes. First and most prominently, the Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA) is referenced for the definitions of "local planning instrument", "planning zone", "residential zone", "rural-residential zone", and "rural small-holding zone" (regulation 3(1)). The regulations do not define these zones independently; they adopt the definitions used in planning schemes made under that Act. This means that a change in the Planning and Development Act or in a local planning scheme automatically affects the classification of land for valuation purposes. For instance, if a local council rezones an area from rural small-holding to residential, the land would then qualify as "designated for residential use" under paragraph (a) of the definition, shifting its assessed value rate from 5% to 3%. Conversely, if a residential zone is changed to something else, the opposite occurs. This creates a direct interplay between planning law and property taxation.

Second, the regulations refer to several redevelopment acts for the definition of "redevelopment scheme": the Armadale Redevelopment Act 2001, East Perth Redevelopment Act 1991, Hope Valley-Wattleup Redevelopment Act 2000, Midland Redevelopment Act 1999, Perry Lakes Redevelopment Act 2005, and Subiaco Redevelopment Act 1994. These acts establish redevelopment authorities that can create precincts (including residential precincts) irrespective of local planning schemes. Land within a residential precinct under a redevelopment scheme qualifies for the 3% rate. This means that redevelopment schemes can override local planning classifications for valuation purposes.

Third, the regulations interact with the parent Valuation of Land Act 1978 at every point. The definitions in the regulations fill gaps in the Act's definitions. The prescribed percentages in regulations 3 and 3A are expressly tied to sections of the Act (s. 4 for both assessed value and unimproved value). The fees in Schedule 1 are payable under sections 28 and 29 of the Act. The duty in regulation 4 supplements the information-gathering powers in the Act.

Fourth, there is potential interaction with local government rating legislation. Assessed value is used as the basis for rates under the Local Government Act 1995 (WA). A change in the prescribed percentages would flow directly into rates calculations for each property. Similarly, land tax under the Land Tax Assessment Act 2002 (WA) uses unimproved value, and the 50% prescription for certain districts affects land tax liability.

Fifth, the regulations interact with the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA) because the valuation roll is likely a document held by a public authority; however, the regulations set specific fees for access, which may override or supplement FOI provisions for that particular document. FOI often allows for access at lower or no cost, but the regulations may be a specific provision that prevails.

Finally, the regulations are amended annually through the Lands Regulations Amendment (Fees and Charges) Regulations series, which update Schedule 1 fees. This shows an administrative practice of linking fee updates to broader cost-recovery or indexation policies.

The regulations have a long amendment history spanning over four decades, as reflected in the compilation table. They were originally gazetted on 6 April 1979 and commenced on 1 July 1979. The earliest amendments were mostly fee adjustments, with annual changes from 1982 through to the 1990s. A significant structural change occurred in 1996 with the Valuation of Land Amendment Regulations (No. 2) 1996 (gazetted 27 December 1996, effective 28 December 1996). This amendment deleted regulation 5 and regulation 7, and inserted the current regulation 6 (fees) and Schedule 1. Before that, the fee schedule may have been in a different form. The current regulation 3 (prescribed assessed value percentage) was inserted on 4 March 2011 by the Valuation of Land Amendment Regulations 2011, effective 1 July 2011. The prior version of regulation 3 presumably set different percentages or had a different structure. The 2011 amendment also introduced the comprehensive definition of "designated for residential use" and the 3%/5% split. Before 2011, there may have been a single percentage for all land. The regulation 3A (prescribed percentage for unimproved value) was inserted on 27 March 2009 by the Valuation of Land Amendment Regulations 2009, effective 30 June 2009. This added the 50% figure for the listed local government districts. Before 2009, that percentage might have been different or set by the Act directly. The definition of "local planning instrument" and references to the Planning and Development Act 2005 were added or updated by amendments in 2006 (gazetted 29 December 2006, effective 1 January 2007). The compilation table also shows an amendment in 1993 that corrected a reprint. The fee schedule has been updated almost every year from 2008 onward, with a gap in 2014 and 2020-2023 also covered. The most recent amendment is SL 2025/85, effective 1 July 2025, indicating that fee updates continue annually. The regulations have been reprinted multiple times (1993, 1999, 2009, 2013), showing that the text has been consolidated. No amendment has ever added a penalty provision. The deletions of regulations 5 and 7 in 1996 suggest those regulations became obsolete. The history shows that the core functions (setting percentages and fees) have remained stable, while the details have been refined.

The provided source text contains no reference to any litigation history. The regulations themselves are not mentioned in any case law in the compilation notes. Any litigation would have arisen from disputes over the interpretation of the Act or the application of these regulations to specific valuations. For example, a landowner might challenge whether their land is "designated for residential use" under regulation 3(1), particularly if the land is in a rural small-holding zone and the Valuer-General has exercised the discretion to deem it not limited to rural living. That discretion could be judicially reviewed on grounds of unreasonableness or error of law. The definition of "residential zone", "residential precinct", "rural-residential zone", and "rural small-holding zone" relies on other Acts, so disputes could also involve interpretation of those instruments. The 50% unimproved value figure in regulation 3A could be challenged if the valuation of improvements is argued to be inaccurate, but the regulation sets a fixed percentage, leaving little room for factual dispute. The fee amounts in Schedule 1 have probably not been litigated, as they are small and set by regulation. There is no mention of any court case in the regulations. It is typical for valuation regulations to be litigated indirectly in the context of rates and land tax objections, but the source does not provide such information. Therefore, any litigation history would need to be researched separately in court databases, but is absent from this document. The user should be aware that the regulations have likely been considered in State Administrative Tribunal or Supreme Court cases, but the source does not support that claim.

Several aspects of the regulations can catch practitioners and landowners off guard. First, the definition of "designated for residential use" includes a discretionary element for rural small-holding zones: the land must be subject to conditions or restrictions that "in the view of the Valuer-General would limit the predominant use of the land to rural living". This is not an objective test; it depends on the Valuer-General's assessment. If the Valuer-General takes a narrow view, land in a rural small-holding zone may be classified as non-residential, attracting the 5% rate instead of 3%. Landowners in such zones cannot assume the 3% rate applies without checking with the Valuer-General.

Second, the definition of "local planning instrument" is limited to instruments under the Planning and Development Act 2005. It does not include other planning controls such as those under the Metropolitan Region Scheme or Improvement Plans unless they are incorporated into a local planning scheme. Land that is effectively residential but not within a formal "residential zone" under a scheme might miss the 3% rate.

Third, the 50% unimproved value percentage in regulation 3A applies only to the specific list of local government districts. The list is alphabetical and includes many shires, but if a shire is omitted or renamed (e.g., Geraldton-Greenough is listed, but Geraldton city might be separate), the land in that district would not get the 50% rate unless it falls within the listed name. The list is fixed in the regulation; any change requires an amendment.

Fourth, the fees in Schedule 1 are updated frequently - annually from 2008 onward. Relying on an outdated printed version or a copy from a year earlier may result in underpayment or overpayment. The current fee as of the latest amendment (SL 2025/85) is $178.70 for a copy of the roll, but this will likely change each 1 July. The fees apply per entry for extracts; if a person needs hundreds of entries, the cost quickly adds up ($9.90 each uncertified). There is no concessional fee for individuals or small businesses.

Fifth, the duty under regulation 4 applies to "agency or instrumentality of the Crown". This is broad and could include government trading enterprises, boards, and commissions. They must comply promptly upon request. Failure to do so could lead to consequences under the Act, though the regulations do not specify. The duty only covers land "which any other person is entitled to use". This may require the entity to know or ascertain whether there is an agreement. If records are poor, compliance may be difficult.

Sixth, the regulations do not define "capital value" . The percentages in regulation 3 apply to "capital value", but that term is defined in the Act. A change in how capital value is determined under the Act (e.g., by using market value or a different methodology) directly affects the assessed value. The regulations do not prescribe valuation methodology.

Seventh, the regulations do not provide a transition or grandfathering mechanism for changes in land use. If a residential zone is rezoned to non-residential, the assessed value rate changes immediately (from 3% to 5%) on the next valuation.

Eighth, the compilation notes reveal that regulations 5 and 7 have been deleted (1996). Any body that still references those regulations (e.g., in old contracts or leases) may be relying on obsolete provisions.

Compliance with the regulations is straightforward for most parties, but requires attention to detail. For public authorities subject to regulation 4, the key step is to maintain a register of land owned or vested in the entity that is used by another person under an agreement or arrangement. This includes leases, licences, permits, and perhaps informal arrangements. The register should contain the location, description, party using the land, terms of use, and any other details the Valuer-General might request. Upon receipt of a written request from the Valuer-General, the entity must provide those details promptly. There is no prescribed form; the entity should respond in writing, clearly identifying the land and the arrangement. It is advisable to keep records of such responses for audit purposes. The regulation does not specify a time limit, but a reasonable time (e.g., 30 days) is prudent.

For landowners (including those with leasehold interests), compliance is passive: the Valuer-General determines the classification and assessed value. However, if a landowner believes the wrong percentage (3% or 5%) has been applied, they should first check the zoning of their land under the local planning scheme or redevelopment scheme. If the land is not in a "residential zone", "residential precinct", or "rural-residential zone", it will likely be subject to the 5% rate. If it is in a "rural small-holding zone", the landowner should consider whether the restrictions on the land limit its predominant use to rural living. If so, they may request the Valuer-General to apply the 3% rate, but must accept that the Valuer-General's view is determinative. The landowner should obtain a copy of the planning scheme and any conditions on the title. They may also lodge an objection under the Act if they disagree.

For any person seeking to access the valuation roll, compliance is easy: pay the prescribed fee. For a copy of the full roll, pay $178.70 (as at 2025). For an extract (single property), pay $9.90 uncertified or $21.40 certified. Payment can be made to the Valuer-General or Landgate? The fees are set in Schedule 1; the method of payment is not specified but would likely be by cheque or electronic transfer. It is essential to check the current fee, as it is updated annually on 1 July. Using an outdated fee may result in refusal. The request should be made to the Valuer-General under sections 28 or 29 of the Act.

For practitioners advising clients, they should familiarise themselves with the definitions. They should also check whether the client's land falls within the list in regulation 3A (the 50% unimproved value districts) because that affects land tax and possibly other assessments. The list is extensive but not exhaustive; if a local government district is not named, the standard unimproved value definition in the Act applies.

Finally, monitoring amendments is crucial. The regulations are amended frequently, especially the fee schedule. The annual Lands Regulations Amendment (Fees and Charges) Regulations series should be checked each July. The percentage amounts (3% and 5%) have been stable since 2011 and the 50% figure since 2009, but they could change via amendment. The list of local government districts in regulation 3A could also be expanded or contracted. Subscription to the Western Australian Government Gazette or legislation website is advisable.