The Ohio union. [volume] (Ashland, Ohio) 1849-1854, 1853-09-07
Bank Taxes,

In discussing the tax law of 1853, the
Ohio State Democrat speaks as follows Of
that portion of it which relates to banks,
which we commend 10 our readers, and
all others who are disposed 10 side with
lie blRkers.
"Bu, it is claimed that bankers are M:
taxed like. other individuais-that they are
not permitted to deduct their Indebtedness
Let US see for a moment. What is it that
The law~proposes to tax in the hands Of ill.,
dividuals! Manirestly, property. What
does the consii,ution-what does right and
Justice say shall be taxed in the hands of
a baak! Property? an property en-
pIoysd in banking, shall bear a burden Of
faration equal 10 that imposed on The
property Of indiridaois," is the language
of the constitution. Now, whit is the
property of a bank! Are not the notes
and bills discounted, and which are draw
ing interest properly! Are not The State
stocks belonging 10 il, and upon which ii
draws interest. property! Are not all of
the money s, effects OF dues, loaned, invest.
ed, or otherwise used or employed with a
view 10 profit, or upon which such bank
or banking company receives, or is emit
lied 10 receive i%nteres'. "proFeriyF" All
Of these would be property in the hands
of an indi tidual; and he would be com.
peeled 10 list them for taxation.
But we are met with the argument that
from his moneys and credits" an individ.
ual may deduct his Indebtedness, and it is
clolned that the same privileges should be
extended to a bank. Tnis is true, and we
are free to admit that it is an anomaly in
the law. lis existence, may, however. be
explained in several ways. 10 the first
place, Indebtedness is permitted only 10 lie
deducted by individuals from the single
item Of moneys and credits, upon The sup
position Of its being limited to the neceesi.
lies Of the owner, and that the moneys on
hand are intended exclusively for The pur-
pose Of speculation or profit. But when
they become the stock iu trade Of The in.
diyidual or corporation, and upon which
tho predicate business, as in the case Of
a banker or broker, they stand precisely
upon a footing with The merrhnudiTe Of
The merchant, and should be taxed "wilh-
out deduction" Any other rule would be
10 permit them 10 evade TAXATION entirely,
for it is well known 10 all who have been
so far initiated in The mysteries Of banking
as 10 be permitted to inspect a bank bal.
ance sheet, that the liabilities 0lUdys foot
up equal 10 the resources. There is an.
other reason why there is no analogy be.
tween the case of an individual and a
bank. The individual who contracts in.
debtedness is compelled 10 pay interest, OF
its equivalent, in enhanced price upon tina
Indebtedness; whereas, the banker is priv
legged by law 10 drdU interest ~ on hi,
o,rn indebtedness. SO, in any light il
which VIC view il, the cases are moi anala.
gous. But, above oil this, the consiitu
ton says: "'The General Assembly sIiaI
provide, by law, for taxing The notes ant
bills discounted or purchased, money,
loaned. and all other property, effects o,
dnes, Of every description, (with0W de
dueIiOn1 Of al banks now existing, o
hereafter created, &C." In like manne
individuals are moi, except 10 The single in
stance mentioned, permitted 10 deduct thci
Indebtedness from theirpropcrty. Througl
tho entire Ia ~. the idea of t~axatinn upoi