The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1876-01-04

deduction made for the taxation to which
the corporation is subject in the state
where 1t is situated. And so corporation
created by the legislature, or under the
general laws, of the state, and having Its
machinery and real estate without the state,
its capital stock is taxed az personal prop
erty notwithstanding that its machinery
and real estpte are taxed elsewhere-that is
to say, that the capital stock of corpora
ton organized under the laws Of Massa-
chuseits, and doing business in Vermont,
would be taxed in that state while its ma
chinory and real estate would be taxable
here.
There was no relief from this species of
double taxation in Vermont until the last
meeting of our legislature. when ii was
remedied in part. 1t was then provided
that the machinery used in any branch of
manufacture, and belonging to any cor
poration, shall be taxed in the town where
1t is situated and that Ii assessing the
stockholders for their stock, there shall be
deducted from the value thereof, the value
of its machinery and real estate, and, also,
the value of all other property belonging
to such corporation and represented by its
stock, which may be situated and taxed In
another state or country ; provided that
the value Of property situated outside of
the state shall not be offset against the
visible property of the corporation situated
in this state The effect of this law, II we
understand it, is simply this The real
estate and machinery of a corporation shall
be assessed to the corporation, and the
| stockholders, instead OF being taxed for the
| par or actual value of then stock, shall only
| be taxed for such value less the value of
| the real estate and machinery owned in
| this state and less The value of the property
of the corporation situated and taxed with
out the state. The property might still be
| subiect to double taxation in another way,
and it sometimes so happens. A corpora
ton having their entire property-real
estate aud machinery-in Vermont would
be taxable here therefor, while the office
of the company being located in another
state would be taxed as corporation OF
that state for the whole amount of itt
stocli-bcing, in effect, double taxation
Of the same property--and our laws give
no relief therefor.
A case something like this happened tc
manufacturing company carrying or
their business in Rutland county, but hav
ing their Office in New York from which
state it derived It's corporate powers-al
though relief from double taxation wal
finally obtained through the action of thu
tax commissioners The property--tha
is, the machinery, real estate and stool
manufactured and in the process of manu-
facture-had already been assessed in Yer
mont and had been taxed, or was liable t,
taxation, thereon, but the corporation, be
ing New York corporation, was assessed
in that state, the valuation being based OIL
the nominal value of the capital stock
| The tax commissioners, however, upon be
ing shown that the property, Represented
by its capital stock, WAS assessed and taxe'
at it's full value in Vermont, vacated tn
assessment in New York, although the.
held that if the capital stock was of create
value than its assessed property in Yer
mont, or if it had not been subjected t
taxation in Vermont, that it would b
liable TO taxation in New York, not to it
stockholders but to the corporation itself
provided in our statute, was not decided
The subject of taxation Of corporate pror
erty is one OF considerable importance, bot
to the stockholders and to the state but
is one, unfortunately, on which there is II
comfy between states-each state regula
ting the matter in its own way without re
gard to the laws Of other states-and it
therefore, behooves individuals proposin,
to form corporations under the laws O
other states to make themselves famiia
with the state laws relative to taxation.