The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-26
BILL SLIPPED THROUGH
TAX BOARD KNEW NOTHING OF THE
NONRESIDENT EXEMPTION LAW,
VIII Probably Be Held InvaIid-VauIt
Cleaners Perpetrating "a Swim
die on HOusehOIders.

I. n. Walker, of the State Board of Tax
Commissioners, called on Controller john
son in the City Hall yesterday morning to
dsclaim any responsibility for the amend
ment to the tax laws made by the last
Legislature which exemptS the personal
property of nonresidents held in trust from
any but state and county taxes. Mr.. Walker
was considerably perturbed about the sub
ject. He had a copy of Morris's House bill,
No. ia in his hands, to show that it origi-
mated in the House and was referred to the
committee on county and township bust
ness, instead of to the ways and means
committee, where it ought to have been
referred The fact that it got into the hands
of this committee, Mr.. Walker said was the
reason that it was passed without his
knowledge. He declared emphatically that
it would be overthrown by the courts. There
is also belief that the second amend
ment, which requires persons and corpora
tons to pay taxes in the county having
jurisdiction of the trust estate, will also
be overthrow, as the Supreme Court re-
Gently held that personal property is to be
taxed in the county where it is held and
controlled by the executor, administrator or
other trustee, regardless of where the per-
son owning 1t may reside Both amend
ments, however, appear to exempt personal
property held in trust from any taxation
other than State and county whether the
beneficiary is a resident or nonresident of
the State.
The publication of the controllers discov-
cry in the morning papers yesterday was
the first intimation the county officials had
of the existence and effect OF the new law,
ana all day the controller was busy with
them trying to figure out its results Ref
erence was made yesterday to estates con-
trolled by the Union Trust Company. 1t
now develops that In one case the bene-
hclary Blanche French, resides in London
The Trust Company IS managing her share
IN an estate, amounting to $4,000. Miss
De PAW S interest in another estate which
the company controls amounts TO S1S500.
1t Is not known how much more is exempted
from city and school taxes by the new
amendments in this city, but the tax COM
missioners realize that, taking all the cities
and towns OF the State It will aggregate
quite a large sum and that considerable
revenue of the school fund will be cut off
if the law is sustained.
No plans have been agreed on as yet to
test the law. Controller johnson expects to
consult with City Attorney Curtis as to
what shall be done. Attorney General
Ketcham will be asked for an opinion by
the tax commissioners. 1t is believed be-
yond doubt that the law will be held un-
constitutional and invalid, as 1t discrimi-
mates in favor of nonresidents of the State,
especially where their personal property is
held in trust The possibility of tax dodg-
ing along this line is extensive
The amended sections which are causing
all the commotion provide Section g.
Personal property of nonresidents OF the
State in the possession or under the CON
troll of any person or corporation as trus-
tee, receiver, executor, administrator or
guardian shall be assessed for state and
county purposes only and in the county
where the court is situated by which said
trustee, receiver executor administrator or
guardian was appointed or to which such
trustee, receiver executor administrator or
guardian reports.
Sec: 10. Personal property in the posses
sion of any person or corporation as trustee
receiver executor, administrator or guar
dian shall be assessed for state and county
purposes in the county where the court is
situated by which said trustee, receiver
executor, administrator or guardian was
appointed or to which such trustee. re-
ceiver, executor, administrator or guardian
reports"