The margin of variance describes the acceptable percentage differences between the opinion of value estimate of two or more valuers for same purpose and within a specific period on a property. The motive of this study is to establish the permissible benchmark for variance of rateable values from the perspective of valuers. Purposive sampling method was adopted among the qualified practising Estate Valuers in Kwara State, Nigeria. This study adopted convergent parallel mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative approaches). The data collection in the quantitative approach was done through a questionnaire survey among 19 valuers and the data were analysed using frequency count and percentage table. The qualitative data were obtained from an interview with 8 valuers and content analysis was employed to analyze the data. Findings showed that 52.6 percent and 50 percent respondents from the questionnaire survey and interview respectively considered a ±10 percentvariance as a reasonable benchmark of variance in rating valuation. This, therefore, suggests that variance above ten percent would be considered as incorrect and this could be a basis for appeals. The implication of this is that there would be a fair medium for resolving assessment discrepancies between the rating authority and ratepayer. Moreover, with the established benchmark, it would reduce considerably the number of appeals. These would eventually reduce cost and time often associated with appeals.