The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1881-06-30

THURSDAY, JUNE ~, 1ooI.
TERnGS=
ONE YEAR......,..... .....-........S1.6o.
SIX MONTHS............:-....... 'oc'
rr,,o Doliars If not paid In advance.
THE TAXATION OF PROPERTY.
Perhaps the most important question
now connected with the finances OF our
State government is the revision OF the
tax laws in such manner as to secure an.
equitable assessment Of all Of the prop
ertv in tie State, to the end that all may.
contribute their proper proportion to the
burden Of government. It is right and
Just that every man should return MS
! property at its fair valuation, and it IS.
dishonest for any one to do otherwise, if
the system werssHetl regulated, for 1t.
would then be npthing more nor less:
than stealing from. the Stately conceal
;ing whatisspro going to the public
streasnrvs for taxes. s Taxation being I'M,
,p,osed IS d rate ate per per cent, all; ;thatis re.
souired or right is, that property in the
State shall sall be returned upon the
same basis m Of valuation, for then, wheth-
er the. rate oGtakation be high or low
every p,rlso5perty !, ( 3 th older would contribute
his proper share to maintain the govern
mlent, and the amount of money ne e
would pay pay into the public treasury, :
would be the same, whether the basis OF
valuation be high or low. For example,
say that you have to raise by taxation
one thousand dollars. Now, if the prop
erty upon Which this sum is to be raised
is valued at one hundred thousand dol
lars, the rate Of taxation would be ten
mi mills on the dollar; if, however, the
same property was valued upon the basis
Of fifty per cent. of this sum it would
! only be fifty thousand dollars, and would
require rate Of taxation Of double the
amount required upon the first valuation,
or twenty mills on the dollar, while ii Its
valuation were double the original sum-
! or two hundred thousand dollars, the rate
of taxation would be reduced to i've
mills upon the dollar, and every prop
ertyholder weuld pay the same amount
of money under either one OF the assess
ments. To illustrate this further, let US
take an individual! case of man whose
property under the first assessment OF
one hundred thousand dollars was valued
at one thousand dollars. His tax to pay
his portion of the thousand dollars to be
raised would be placed at ten mills on
the dollar, and would be equal to ten
dollars; or the. one hundredth part OF the
whole sum to be raised, as he owns one
hundredth part of allaof the property
upon which the tax is to be assessed.
Now if alI;of the property is doubled IN
valuation his property would be worth
stwosshousand dollars, and as he only has
to raise his proportion Of the thousand
dollars, which is the one hundredth part
or ten dollars, instead of paying ten mills
onthe dollar, which would raise twenty
dollars, he only has to pay i've milis'
which. would raise the ten dollars re-
quired. If, however, instead of being
doubled in valuation, the property is
lessened by half in its value, our exam
ple's property would only be worth i've
hundred dollars. while he would still
have to pay his part of the thousand
dollarssto be raised, or ten dollars. 10
raise this sum would now require a tax
of twenty mills instead of one of ten
mills. Thus is seen q fact we'll known
to all who have thought upon the SUBJ
iect-that the rate Of taxation does not
necessarily settle the question as to
whether taxes are high or low, tor that
depends also upon the fact as to whether
the assessment of property is high or
low. 1t will also be seen from this that
it makes no difference to the taxpayer,
where a given sum IS to be raised,
whether the basis of assessment IS hlgh
or low, provided all property is returned
at the same relative valuation. Just
there, however, is one Of the troubles.
In some counties of the State property IS
returned higher than in others, and in
every county there are some men who
return their property at a rate nearer a
proper valuation than others. Therefore
some counties pay more than their share
of the taxes, and some citizens pay more
than their proportion, because the re-
turns have not been uniform. This is
the trouble about any other than mar
ket valuation of property for taxation.
Whenever it is left to the discretion OF
the owners of property to fix its value
for taxes, they are prone to undervalue
IL and console themselves that theirs is
in proportion to what other people re-
turn theirs at, and generally it is because
most persons look at the matter in the
same light. Not only is this true, but as
- nars,nol nronerty we would be safe in
saving that it is not generally returned
ut one-half of its true value in this State,
and hundreds of thousands of dollars of
It are not returned for taxes at all. This
makes the burden of government fall
heaviest upon the most conscientious
MI - sorootb;po sbou1d he done