Skip to main content

Exemptions from Real Property Taxation in New York State: 2025 County, City, and Town Assessment Rolls

Introduction

All real property in New York is subject to taxation unless specific legal provisions grant it exempt status, whereas personal property is not subject to taxation. Real property tax exemptions are granted on the basis of many different criteria, including the use to which the property is put, the owner's ability to pay taxes, the desire of the state and local governments to encourage certain economic or social activities, and other such considerations.1 Certain exemptions provide full relief from taxation (wholly exempt property) and others reduce the taxes which would otherwise be payable by varying degrees (partially exempt property). Some exemptions apply to taxes levied for county, city/town, and school purposes, whereas others pertain only to some of these purposes. Yet another difference involves the extent of local government autonomy: while some exemptions are mandated by state law, others are subject to local option and/or local determination of eligibility criteria.

This report presents exemption data for 2025 assessment rolls prepared by local assessors throughout New York.2 It covers town, city, and county (Tompkins and Nassau Counties) assessment rolls only; village rolls are not included.

Ultimately, the accuracy of the figures presented depends on the accuracy of the data submitted on the rolls. Although the overwhelming majority of reported exemptions could be related to specific legal provisions through the standardized reporting system provided by NYS Department of Taxation and Finance, Office of Real Property Tax Services (ORPTS), a very small percentage could not be classified because incorrect codes were used, and are thus omitted from certain tables in this report. Similarly, any errors made by assessors in determining the value of a parcel, or the extent to which this value is exempt from taxation, will appear in the data contained herein. Also, experience has shown that some assessors may not keep the values placed on wholly exempt property fully up to date, as valuation of such property has, for the most part, no effect on local tax revenue. Incorrect assessed values may overstate or understate the effect of exemptions on local tax bases.

The remainder of the report presents a summary of the 2025 statewide statistics on exempt property in graphic and tabular format, followed by Appendix A, which contains a list of abbreviations and definitions for terms used in the detailed tables that comprise Appendix B.

Figure 1: Two pie charts labeled Distribution of Exemptions By Type of Ownership (2025). Pie chart 1 shows the Percent of Exemptions as Partly Exempt, Private (91.5%), Partly Exempt, Public (0.3%), Wholly Exempt, Private (2.8%) and Wholly Exempt, Public (5.4%). Pie chart 2 shows Percent of Exempt Value as Partly Exempt, Private (27.3%), Partly Exempt, Public (0.4%), Wholly Exempt, Private (17.4%) and Wholly Exempt, Public (54.7%).

Figure 1: Two pie charts labeled Distribution of Exemptions By Type of Ownership (2025). Pie chart 1 shows the Percent of Exemptions as Partly Exempt, Private (91.5%), Partly Exempt, Public (0.3%), Wholly Exempt, Private (2.8%) and Wholly Exempt, Public (5.4%). Pie chart 2 shows Percent of Exempt Value as Partly Exempt, Private (27.5%), Partly Exempt, Public (0.4%), Wholly Exempt, Private (17.4%) and Wholly Exempt, Public (54.7%).

In recent years, a local option exemption for ad valorem special district taxation purposes has been added.  This option applies in connection with RPTL (Real Property Tax Law) 466-a only, that is, Volunteer Firefighters/Ambulance Workers and their Surviving Spouse exemption.  The ex_application indication digit for this exemption is '8'.  Because of the limited number of this exemption and due to the structure of the current programs utilized to produce the exemption data for this report, the data for year 2025 exemptions for purposes of special district taxation are presented within the report below:

          2025 SUMMARY OF EXEMPTION  4163-8

           (Volunteer Firefighters/Ambulance Worker)              

Special District Application
Total Number of Exemptions 2,674
Total Exempt Assessed Value (in $000) $49,229
Total Exempt Full Value (in $000) $105,849
Total Assessed Value of Parcels w/Exemption (in $000) $518,398
Total Full Value of Parcels w/Exemption (in $000) $1,105,774

Table 1. Real Property tax exemptions by property group, 2025 assessment rolls

Table 1. Real Property tax exemptions, 2025 rolls
Group Number of exemptions Equalized Exempt Value ($000)
A. Residential Property other than Multiple Dwellings Non-Residential Property Owned by Certain Individuals 2,376,323 199,188,833
B. Property of New York State Government and Agencies 21,659 148,708,070
C. Property of Municipal Governments and Agencies, School Districts, BOCES, and Special Districts 115,778 291,985,169
D. Property of U.S. and Foreign Governments and Agencies, International or Interstate Agencies, and Indian Tribes 4,959 76,098,708
E. Property of Private Community Service Organizations, Social Organizations, and Professional Societies 71,349 177,132,282
F. Industrial, Commercial, and Public Service Property 18,227 99,393,909
G. Urban Renewal Property, Public Housing, and Private Subsidized Housing (Multiple Dwellings) 80,768 126,217,187
H. Agricultural and Forest Properties 116,064 16,447,370
Total, Valid Exemption Codes 2,805,127 1,135,171,527
Invalid Codes 3,580 2,406,995
TOTAL 2,808,707 1,137,578,523

Table 2. Exemptions for county purposes: Geographic areas with highest and lowest incidence of exempt value, 2025 assessment rolls

A. Ten with highest incidence
Rank Counties Cities Towns
Name Pct. exempt Name Pct. exempt Name Pct. exempt
1. Tompkins 37.63% Salamanca (Cat.) 69.17% Scriba (Osw.) 83.74%
2. Seneca 36.96% Rensselaer (Ren.) 66.90% Alfred (All.) 78.96%
3. Oswego 35.66% Ithaca (Tom.) 58.01% Blenheim (Scho.) 73.93%
4. St Lawrence 34.88% Albany (Alb.) 55.16% Romulus (Sen.) 73.89%
5. Oneida 33.18% Peekskill (Wes.) 49.31% Marcy (One.) 71.80%
6. Allegany 31.27% Syracuse (Ono.) 48.26% Greenwood (Ste.) 70.27%
7. Niagara 30.99% Geneva (Ont.) 48.03% Ashford (Cat.) 69.93%
8. Schoharie 30.57% Oneonta (Ots.) 47.25% Massena (St. L.) 68.58%
9 Wyoming 29.10% Troy (Ren.) 46.51% Verona (One.) 68.31%
10. Albany 28.72% Watervliet (Alb.) 45.82% Cohocton (Ste.) 67.60%
B. Ten with lowest incidence
Rank Counties Cities Towns
Name Pct. exempt Name Pct. exempt Name Pct. exempt
1. Hamilton 8.03% Mechanicville (Sar.) 8.35% Benson (Ham.) 0.90%
2. Putnam 9.25% Tonawanda (Eri.) 11.39% Inlet (Ham.) 1.81%
3. Warren 9.53% Lockport (Nia.) 11.61% Arietta (Ham.) 1.92%
4. Washington 11.89% Sherrill (One.) 13.19% Hope (Ham.) 2.72%
5. Nassau 12.02% Beacon (Dut) 13.70% Stratford (Ful.) 2.79%
6. Saratoga 12.33% Long Beach (Nas.) 14.26% Olive (Uls.) 2.90%
7. Ulster 13.51% Rye (Wes.) 14.77% Bolton (War.) 3.01%
8. Columbia 13.71% North Tonawanda (Nia.) 15.92% Dresden (Was.) 3.08%
9. Greene 14.84% Glen Cove (Nas.) 17.44% Ellicottville (Cat.) 3.13%
10. Essex 15.61% Saratoga Springs (Sar.) 18.23% Horicon (War.) 3.13%

Table 3. Exemptions for county purposes: Counties ranked by percent of full value exempt, 2025 assessment rolls*

Table 3. Exemptions for county purposes: Counties ranked by percent of full value exempt, 2025 rolls*
Rank County No. of exemptions Exempt value ($000) Pct. of value exempt
1. Tompkins 7,019 7,003,342 37.63%
2. Seneca 4,907 2,319,320 36.96%
3. Oswego 10,915 5,444,484 35.66%
4. St Lawrence 12,352 4,675,601 34.88%
5. Oneida 21,117 9,856,252 33.18%
6. Allegany 7,147 1,540,519 31.27%
7. Niagara 18,466 9,511,763 30.99%
8. Schoharie 5,047 1,691,605 30.57%
9. Wyoming 7,103 1,519,818 29.10%
10. Albany 20,853 16,290,468 28.72%
11. Jefferson 11,805 4,406,752 27.01%
12. Tioga 4,869 1,443,308 26.12%
13. Cattaraugus 10,496 2,553,256 26.06%
14. Rensselaer 12,071 6,337,043 25.53%
15. Broome 12,703 5,027,557 24.98%
16. Livingston 7,554 2,002,566 24.97%
17. Yates 4,600 1,472,944 24.95%
18. Steuben 15,133 2,891,754 24.78%
19. Chautauqua 16,334 3,932,207 24.44%
20. Montgomery 6,283 1,370,740 24.06%
21. Lewis 5,196 1,051,262 23.83%
22. Cayuga 10,039 2,424,498 22.53%
23. Onondaga 37,852 14,241,522 22.20%
24. Sullivan 8,215 4,808,459 22.18%
25. Genesee 8,191 1,336,200 22.13%
26. Schenectady 9,298 4,771,670 21.89%
27. Franklin 5,069 1,713,609 21.77%
28. Cortland 4,886 1,039,635 20.94%
29. Westchester 32,919 65,403,404 20.88%
30. Otsego 6,667 1,805,602 20.52%
31. Madison 8,342 1,766,761 20.07%
32. Suffolk 118,713 132,851,270 20.02%
33. Chenango 5,968 925,798 19.69%
34. Dutchess 20,511 12,537,093 19.53%
35. Clinton 8,720 1,936,563 19.53%
36. Orleans 5,442 693,439 19.32%
37. Herkimer 6,520 1,816,205 19.21%
38. Chemung 7,117 1,517,587 18.70%
39. Wayne 9,670 2,108,597 18.23%
40. Ontario 10,680 3,594,031 18.22%
41. Orange 24,341 13,369,010 17.65%
42. Monroe 54,501 16,903,561 17.34%
43. Schuyler 3,138 558,451 17.21%
44. Erie 69,100 23,259,034 17.09%
45. Delaware 5,286 1,863,392 16.34%
46. Rockland 15,209 12,115,004 15.98%
47. Fulton 4,938 1,114,830 15.84%
48. Essex 5,270 1,976,867 15.61%
49. Greene 5,544 2,100,629 14.84%
50. Columbia 7,494 2,470,584 13.71%
51. Ulster 14,212 5,777,247 13.51%
52. Saratoga 16,383 6,139,399 12.33%
53. Nassau 109,224 90,026,266 12.02%
54. Washington 7,997 1,082,557 11.89%
55. Warren 6,470 1,885,212 9.53%
56. Putnam 6,591 2,186,263 9.25%
57. Hamilton 825 364,174 8.03%
*Excludes New York City boroughs; New York City data included in Table 4

Table 4. Exemptions for county purposes: Cities ranked by percent of full value exempt, 2025 assessment rolls

Table 4. Exemptions for county purposes: Cities ranked by percent of full value exempt, 2025 rolls
Rank City No. of exemptions Exempt value ($000) Pct. of value exempt
1. Salamanca 1,458 296,489 69.17%
2. Rensselaer 426 1,471,090 66.90%
3. Ithaca 848 3,929,582 58.01%
4. Albany 5,824 9,599,101 55.16%
5. Peekskill 882 2,770,197 49.31%
6. Syracuse 6,963 7,338,119 48.26%
7. Geneva 743 732,676 48.03%
8. Oneonta 487 626,790 47.25%
9. Troy 1,857 2,720,441 46.51%
10. Watervliet 342 567,278 45.82%
11. Rome 2,749 1,666,109 45.40%
12. Niagara Falls 3,500 2,376,340 45.30%
13. Little Falls 312 223,220 44.40%
14. Ogdensburg 706 320,851 43.98%
15. Jamestown 2,163 664,542 39.76%
16. Elmira 1,576 634,024 38.94%
17. Schenectady 2,965 2,424,442 36.98%
18. Olean 1,071 362,900 34.95%
19. Yonkers 5,389 14,541,049 34.83%
20. Norwich 325 168,301 34.68%
21. Binghamton 2,164 1,194,254 34.01%
22. Utica 3,491 1,563,704 33.95%
23. Johnstown 584 370,742 33.39%
24. Cortland 746 447,002 33.19%
25. Watertown 1,535 750,559 32.84%
26. White Plains 1,206 5,943,558 31.89%
27. Oswego 1,050 586,008 30.99%
28. Poughkeepsie 1,114 1,269,714 30.37%
29. Dunkirk 1,090 283,884 30.22%
30. Amsterdam 1,147 415,826 29.74%
31. Auburn 1,696 715,226 29.73%
32. Canandaigua 552 491,440 29.56%
33. Plattsburgh 1,016 577,386 29.40%
34. Oneida 1,094 281,954 29.18%
35. New Rochelle 1,807 5,840,326 28.97%
36. Hornell 755 146,936 28.31%
37. Kingston 1,337 1,247,770 25.90%
38. Hudson 381 379,980 25.70%
39. Gloversville 875 199,785 24.91%
40. Newburgh 914 692,903 24.33%
41. Buffalo 17,749 6,917,958 24.09%
42. Mt Vernon 1,461 2,505,982 23.47%
43. Corning 840 246,414 23.16%
44. Cohoes 834 418,529 23.08%
45. Fulton 754 178,937 22.91%
46. Glens Falls 904 447,403 22.73%
47. Rochester 10,692 3,425,672 22.45%
48. Batavia 1,015 250,149 21.88%
49. Port Jervis 528 240,734 21.46%
50. Middletown 1,101 739,208 21.06%
51. Lackawanna 1,242 320,948 21.03%
52. New York City 163,086 471,160,373 20.77%
53. Saratoga Springs 1,253 1,916,251 18.23%
54. Glen Cove 641 1,254,356 17.44%
55. North Tonawanda 2,782 552,838 15.92%
56. Rye 429 2,131,451 14.77%
57. Long Beach 2,625 1,503,742 14.26%
58. Beacon 716 359,569 13.70%
59. Sherrill 62 46,025 13.19%
60. Lockport 1,193 183,538 11.61%
61. Tonawanda 1,361 179,372 11.39%
62. Mechanicville 231 34,974 8.35%

Table 5. Exemptions for county purposes: Towns with over 50 percent full value exempt, 2025 assessment rolls

Table 5. Exemptions for county purposes: Towns with over 50 percent full value exempt, 2025 rolls
Rank Town No. of exemptions Exempt value ($000) Pct. of value exempt
1. Scriba (Osw.) 614 3,236,567 83.74%
2. Alfred (All.) 323 584,971 78.96%
3. Blenheim (Scho.) 128 196,323 73.93%
4. Romulus (Sen.) 397 1,031,353 73.89%
5. Marcy (One.) 577 2,216,254 71.80%
6. Greenwood (Ste.) 311 194,532 70.27%
7. Ashford (Cat.) 357 534,976 69.93%
8. Massena (St. L.) 1,007 1,505,455 68.58%
9. Verona (One.) 1,028 1,189,205 68.31%
10. Cohocton (Ste.) 711 406,901 67.60%
11. Lewiston (Nia.) 1,301 4,405,922 66.31%
12. Dover (Dut.) 573 2,276,871 65.42%
13. Harrisburg (Lew.) 260 104,935 61.76%
14. Tyre (Sen.) 308 195,423 60.67%
15. Le Ray (Jef.) 814 1,072,128 60.15%
16. Arkwright (Cha.) 205 179,306 59.43%
17. Cherry Creek (Cha.) 257 129,320 55.45%
18. Nichols (Tio.) 261 285,875 55.29%
19. Delhi (Del.) 329 678,670 52.86%
20. Mount Morris (Liv.) 614 301,905 52.71%
21. Wethersfield (Wyo.) 321 100,242 52.60%
22. Orangeville (Wyo.) 312 173,012 52.42%
23. Fairfield (Her.) 348 162,294 51.48%
24. Orleans (Jef.) 361 668,185 51.47%
25. Farmersville (Cat.) 264 128,546 50.68%
26. Canton (St. L.) 859 650,276 50.21%
27. Eaton (Mad.) 636 357,790 50.12%

Table 6. Geographic areas with highest and lowest incidence of local-option exempt value, 2025 assessment rolls

A. Ten with highest incidence
Rank Counties Cities Towns
Name Pct. local-option* Name Pct. local-option* Name Pct. local-option*
1. Fulton 24.26% Johnstown (Ful.) 37.56% Ontario (Way.) 62.23%
2. Hamilton 20.29% Saratoga Springs (Sar.) 31.23% Shelter Island (Suf.) 47.42%
3. Oswego 20.22% Auburn (Cay.) 26.52% Lake Pleasant (Ham.) 46.13%
4. Wayne 19.84% Buffalo (Erie.) 21.64% Jewett (Gre.) 45.55%
5. Monroe 19.68% Tonawanda (Erie.) 19.68% Chautauqua (Cha.) 44.95%
6. Putnam 19.22% Rochester (Mon.) 18.21% Rhinebeck (Dut.) 40.48%
7. Saratoga 18.31% Lackawanna (Eri.) 17.15% Warren (Her.) 39.16%
8. Nassau 18.18% Newburgh (Ora.) 17.00% Piercefield (St. L.) 38.10%
9. Washington 15.83% Poughkeepsie (Dut.) 16.66% Cornwall (Ora.) 37.80%
10. Columbia 15.75% Beacon (Dut.) 14.55% Fenner (Mad.) 36.56%
B. Ten with lowest incidence
Rank Counties Cities Towns
Name Pct. local-option* Name Pct. local-option* Name Pct. local-option*
1. Allegany 3.42% Little Falls (Her.) 1.89% Red House (Cat.) 0.00%
2. Tompkins 3.81% Ithaca (Tom.) 2.28% Blenheim (Scho.) 0.25%
3. Seneca 3.83% White Plains (Wes.) 2.39% Harrisburg (Lew.) 0.33%
4. Wyoming 3.85% Binghamton (Bro.) 2.53% Romulus (Sen.) 0.67%
5. Yates 4.24% Rensselaer (Ren.) 2.55% Alfred (All.) 0.69%
6. Schuyler 4.34% Albany (Alb.) 3.03% Cherry Creek (Cha.) 0.87%
7. Schoharie 4.91% Watervliet (Alb.) 3.16% Clare (St. L.) 0.88%
8. Cattaraugus 5.07% Ogdensburg (St. L.) 3.19% Orleans (Jef.) 0.93%
9. Delaware 5.10% Salamanca (Cat.) 3.74% Delhi (Del.) 0.95%
10. Franklin 5.13% Schenectady (Sche.) 3.78% Ashford (Cat.) 0.98%
*Exempt value of local-option exemptions divided by total exempt value.

Table 7. Exempt value attributable to local option, counties ranked by percent of exempt value, 2025 assessment rolls

Table 7. Exempt value attributable to local option, counties ranked by percent of exempt value, 2025 rolls
Rank County Exempt value local option ($000) Total exempt value ($000) Pct. of value exempt
1. Fulton 392,566 1,618,223 24.26%
2. Hamilton 87,046 429,064 20.29%
3. Oswego 1,302,654 6,441,124 20.22%
4. Wayne 614,450 3,096,661 19.84%
5. Monroe 4,366,820 22,191,696 19.68%
6. Putnam 606,597 3,156,329 19.22%
7. Saratoga 1,474,784 8,052,471 18.31%
8. Nassau 20,013,766 110,112,145 18.18%
9. Washington 263,849 1,667,064 15.83%
10. Columbia 479,216 3,043,035 15.75%
11. Warren 367,371 2,442,673 15.04%
12. Erie 4,615,653 31,281,167 14.76%
13. Onondaga 2,566,083 17,646,833 14.54%
14. Ulster 1,065,178 7,443,608 14.31%
15. Rockland 2,127,298 15,102,773 14.09%
16. Orange 2,190,705 16,133,385 13.58%
17. Cayuga 424,297 3,128,475 13.56%
18. Dutchess 1,969,774 14,942,527 13.18%
19. Greene 357,219 2,718,389 13.14%
20. Essex 294,401 2,327,848 12.65%
21. Cortland 167,942 1,395,720 12.03%
22. Rensselaer 890,344 7,453,782 11.94%
23. Suffolk 16,892,083 149,481,010 11.30%
24. Orleans 115,154 1,057,501 10.89%
25. Chautauqua 534,114 5,091,807 10.49%
26. Clinton 244,129 2,553,454 9.56%
27. Montgomery 168,868 1,836,733 9.19%
28. Livingston 231,743 2,550,454 9.09%
29. Chenango 120,854 1,353,638 8.93%
30. Schenectady 518,833 5,907,267 8.78%
31. Broome 561,163 6,577,894 8.53%
32. Steuben 316,175 3,737,269 8.46%
33. Chemung 172,951 2,201,226 7.86%
34. Albany 1,422,114 18,147,850 7.84%
35. Ontario 355,301 4,545,385 7.82%
36. Genesee 138,876 1,851,776 7.50%
37. Westchester 5,563,688 74,424,135 7.48%
38. Herkimer 168,524 2,406,284 7.00%
39. Oneida 819,374 11,833,650 6.92%
40. Jefferson 351,228 5,100,552 6.89%
41. Madison 164,054 2,395,944 6.85%
42. Lewis 87,359 1,304,631 6.70%
43. Otsego 154,890 2,329,896 6.65%
44. Tioga 122,030 1,918,259 6.36%
45. Sullivan 338,619 5,359,001 6.32%
46. Niagara 685,973 11,438,291 6.00%
47. St Lawrence 285,737 5,544,991 5.15%
48. Franklin 107,823 2,102,460 5.13%
49. Delaware 118,780 2,329,213 5.10%
50. Cattaraugus 163,498 3,223,870 5.07%
51. Schoharie 97,587 1,986,993 4.91%
52. Schuyler 31,947 736,942 4.34%
53. Yates 71,553 1,688,504 4.24%
54. Wyoming 72,414 1,881,392 3.85%
55. Seneca 101,435 2,649,979 3.83%
56. Tompkins 286,726 7,530,230 3.81%
57. Allegany 67,128 1,961,153 3.42%

Table 8. City/Town distribution of exempt value attributable to local option exemptions: 2025 assessment rolls

Table 8. City/Town distribution of exempt value attributable to local option exemptions: 2025 rolls
Percent of value in local option exemptions Number of cities/towns Percent of cities/towns
0 - 9.99 533 53.568%
10 - 19.99 333 33.467%
20 - 20.99 99 9.950%
30 - 30.99 24 2.412%
40 or more 6 0.603%

1 Most exemptions are granted under Article 4 of the Real Property Tax Law, but others are authorized by a wide variety of statutes ranging from the Agriculture and Markets Law to the Transportation Law.

2The material in the report relates to exemptions only. Not covered are the restricted assessments which apply to certain types of property (e.g., condominiums), tax abatement programs, and formerly real property which has been statutorily redefined as personal (non-taxable) property (e.g., certain switching equipment owned by telephone companies). Restricted assessments, tax abatements, and statutory redefinitions, like exemptions, are tax expenditures in that they reduce or shift tax liability.

| Table of contents | Top of page |

Updated: