Morris tribune., 1898-08-31
REAL ESTATE TAXATION,

The charge is often made in an in
definite way that the poor pay heavier
taxes relatively than the rich. This
is strikingly true in the large cities
but that it is also true in county dis
tricts is shown by the report of the
state bureau Of labor, which has been
investigating the question.
'In the seventy-eight counties out
side of the three counties of Hennepin.
Ramsey and ST. Louis, there were
tabulated by the bureau the statistics
of 5,213 sales of improved acres of a
selling value of S13,809, 429, and with
an assessed valuation for taxation of
SIS, 451 ,597. This assessment was 39.4O
per cent of the selling value recorded
in the Office of the register of deeds.
/ ''In the same counties were tabu-
lated 1922 sales of unilnproved acres
Eof selling value stated in the deeds
of. S12,921,8l1. and with an assessed
valuation of $5,390,678, This latter
was 1887 per cent of the stated con
sideration of the deeds. Of the i'm
proved acres conveyed there were
$50, $40 and the unimproved 854,129.
''To ascertain as fully as possible
whether the poorer owners were as
sessed more or less than the richer,
these sales were tabulated in seven
groups according to the amounts of
the several sales.
For the improved acres the average
price per acre was the smallest in the
group for sales less than $500 each,
That average steadily increased to
the group with the largest sales,
those over $4,000. The average as
sessed value increased also from the
lowest to the highest group, but did
not increase in the same ratio with
the selling price. Hence the assessed
value was for the land included in
the smaller sales 6629 per cent of
the selling value, while for the largest
sales it was only 1884 per cent, or
less than ona-half as much relatively.
"The poorest group was paying one
and one-half times its due share of
taxes, and the richest group was pay
ing only threefourths of theirs.
''In the unimproved acres the aver
age selling and assessed value per
acre increased from the smallest
group up to that including sales be-
tween $4,000 and $1,000, then ii
decreased to the highest group, or
group with the largest amount of
sales. The percentage of assessment
was highest with the group with the
lowest assessment per acre. 1t de-
creased until the maximum per acre
was reached and then increased.
'The figures here show that the in
equality of assessment is not primari-
ly or essentially one between rich and
poor, but is rather one between the
owner of cheap or dear land. The
land least valuable or least improved
is assessed relatively the most and
the land most valuable or most i'm
proved is assessed relatively the least.
''The rich owner of, or speculator in,
unimproved acres is made to pay in
creased taxes as well as the poor man
with small farm with little improve
ments thereon. Under this arrange
ment the poor owners of realty as
rule, bear heavier burden of taxation
than do their weather. neighbors
''They own larger relative pro-
portion of the improved farms with
poor buildings and few Improvements.
''The inequality of taxation between
rich and poor is thus considerable, al
though less than that shown in the
tables between the highest and low
est priced lands, whether improved
or unimproved.
"This practical discrimination be-
tween the rich and the poor, as well
as the variation in the relative assess
ment of the more and less valuable
acre property is unjust from the
standpoint of our present taxation
laws. It is, however, an approximate
to fair assessment according to the
theories of the so-called single tax.
as those theories are explained by some
Of their advocates. The lands, good
and bad, improved and unimproved,
are assessed according to their value