Grand River times. [volume] (Grand Haven, Mich.) 1851-18??, 1853-04-20
For the Grand River Times.
The New Tax Law.

|
The New Tax Law.
The passage Of the present law can only be
considered as the commencement of radical
reform in our system of taxation.
The point arrived at, of taxing property at
its full value, would be if carried an important
amendment of the old law. We hope all our
citizens will take the horse without looking it
in the mouth, except so far as it becomes neces-
sary to crticise it for the purpose of preparing
the public for further amendments.
| Though faulty, it is better than the old law,
and should be fairly and faithfully carried into
effect. In our opinion our system of taxation
has radical defects which we will state, not for
the purpose of giving any one a pretext for con-
demning it wholly, and opposing its fair execu-
| ton, but as our contribution towards such dis
cussion as shall cause such amendments as will
ultimately give us perfect system of taxation.
lst All property, real and personal including
monies, should be taxed nothing should be ex-
empted from taxation. All property shares
equally in the benefits and protection of law.
Why then make certain class share all the
|
efts of law without its burdens 1t may be
said that the intention of this law is to remove
the burdens Of taxation from the poor mans
shoulders This is an argument unworthy of
an enlightened view of the design of taxation,
but let us take it as it is and see if what is as
serted is true.
poor man may have nothing except vii
lage lot, or perhaps forty acres of land. This
is not exempt, while his rich neighbours house
hold furniture, books, &C., perhaps of ten times
the value pay no taxes The exemption of GER
tain property from taxation is no special benefit
to any class as all avail themselves of its pro-
visions. 1t only lessons the amount of taxable
property of the State, without benefting any
one. We hope the next legislature will repeal
all that portion of the tax law exempting prop
erty from taxation.
3D. Credits ought not to be taxed.
| A gives his o for one hundred dollars for
value received in money or property. Now, it
is either true that will have the property
which this note represents and will pay taxes on
it, or he has spent or consumed it, and must pay
it from his future earnings or profits. If then,
you tax the note in BIS hands you either tax the
same property twice, or you tax property before
ii is created-a peeping into futurity, and count
ing of chickens before they hatch on the part
Of our worthy law makers, which would be
laughabe if it were less burdensome AS it is,
there is a sober reality about this method of
extracting the dimes from ones pocket which
cannot well be laughed at.
Sd. Our present plan of fining man twen-
ty-fve dollars for refusing to give list of his
property is calculated to catch the small rogues
and let all the large ones 60 through. fla man
has property which he can easily conceal, on
which the taxes would be fifty dollars, he can
pay his fine, and still make twenty-five dollars.
Any one can see this. Consequently, the poor
man is amused with the unsubstantal pottage
of exemption, while the rich man gets this great
advantage in reality.
4th. BY our present law oaths are unnecessa-
rily multiplied. All writer's denounce this as
bad policy. An oath in such cases comes to be
regarded as matter of course; a mere formal.
ty loses its solemnity, and fails to meet the end
for which it is designed.
Why not strike out the clause imposing fine,
and that requiring an oath, and substitute one
making it the duty Of the supervisor to add all
such property as from his own knowledge or
credible information from others has been omit
ted by any person in giving the list of his prop
erty and multiply the aggregate value of such
property by four, or even by ten, for the pur
pose of taxation. This would catch the large
rogue as we'll as the small one, by proportioning
the magnitude of the punishment to that of the
offence which the present law does not.
We think that these amendments will simpli-
fly our tax laws, and remove those objections to
it, which by making it appear unjust and I'M
equal, afford persons of easy conscience suf-
icient pretext for attempting to evade it and
prevent its proper enforcement.
If property only is taxed, there is no possibil-
ity of its being doubly taxed, and every one
would see the propriety of taxing all propertyat
its full ualue The taxation of property now ex-
empt, would more than make good in the aggre-
gate what would be lost by excluding credits.
Cor,o of N cartain clnse yho sean, 70 consid-