The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1881-03-18

and evidences Of Indebtedness is ever
listed.
Some Of the reasons for this readily
appear. The law contemplates the
listing of all kinds of property at its
actual cash value for purposes of tax.
alton; all know that in practice this is
not the case. On the average property
would sell for a fourth more than its
assessed value. If note. book account,
or mortgage is found or returned to
the assessor it is listed, and must pay
the uniform rate onits face value; and
that in face of the fact that it's actual
cash value may be small on account of
the difficulty and expense of collecting
it. Here then we find in practice a
serious violation of a true and just
uniformity. Money on hand earns
nothing, and the dishonest holder rea-
sons that, as it can earn nothing it
should pay nothing, and conceals it
from The assessor. Other men who
would like to be honest, but knowing
that others conceal from the assessor,
to make taxation as uniform as they
can. conceal theirs. Now the question
arises: Would it not be better to take
moneys and all forms of credit out of
the taxable list? 1t can be argued that
these kinds of property are forms of
surplus wealth, and are largely owned
by the rich, and that a law exempting
them from taxation would favor the
rich and place heavier burden on la
Dor. If this were true none would op-
pose it more Zealously than We 1t is
question worthy of thorough discus
sion. From our own observations and
the observations and opinions of others
we are satisfied that seventy-fve per
cent of this property escapes taxation
now and that very large share of i
is owned by the rich. The twenty-five |
per cent that is reached by the asses
sor is owned largely by men of very
moderate means. These bear an I'M
equal burden of taxation, and can only
be relieved from it by taking such
property out of the list subject to uni
form taxation. Let us look into the
matter Of the supposed imposition of
heavier burden on labor by taking
moneys and credits out of the list of
taxable property. Could not man
who wished to borrow money, to buy
land or improve it, get it at a lower
rate of interest if the credit were not
subject to taxation? He most assur-
edly could. When he pays for the use
of the credit he pays the tax. If his
creditor is dishonest and conceals the
credit from the assessor he keeps the
tax for his own benefit, and the debtor
must help make up the deficiency by
an increased tax The loaner of money
takes into account the tax he is liable
to pay; if he can escape the tax that is
his own gain. Another measure that |
We believe would partially remedy the
difficulty would be to take moneys and |
credits out of the rule of uniform tax
alton and subject them to a specific tax
of say the half of one per cent; that no
one would feel burdensome, and that
would remove the temptation to con-
cealment.
A tax of one-half of one per cent on
all the moneys and credits of the state
would raise large revenue and light
en- taxation on other kinds of property.
But with money plenty and competing
for safe investment we believe that it
would tighten the burden of labor to a
greater extent to take money and cred
it's out of the list of taxable property.
Labor could then b orrow on more IA
vorable terms,and dishonesty and self
ishness could not appropriate taxes
paid in interest by the borrower to the
lender who pockets them for his own
benefit, while the borrower must pay
heavier tax to make good the virtual
robbing.