New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-02-09
NETWORKS TAX SHARE.
.,,r STATE TAX COMMISSION SAYS IT IS
NOT TOO LARGE.
,xy FIGURES AND FACTS ADVANCED TO PROVE
THAT THE CITY is NOT MADE TO BEAR
HEAVIER BURDEN pRoPoRTIoNATELY



-. state Tax Commissioners. alleging that tho
. >, New-York is over-assessed for the benefit Of
e c,ste AZ large the Commissioners in a mes
w w 20 the Legislature to-day say:
~, vey OF the fact that great dissatisfaction
sxn-essed In New-York City with the table
70 .,uarzat!on made by the State Board in Sep
o,cr last as &, affected that city. X may not he
w.. ~ state some facts In relation thereto The
-. added to New-York City by the equalization
!, 1901 was SIS sss 1903. and this sum- large as II
-s,-esented the difference between So per cent
rate A, which New-York was credited with
- assessed relative 20 full value and 66 plus
- .s,t the average rate fixed tor the entire State
y have avalled ourselves OF many sources Of in
NATION in the eTor; TO determine equitahly the
al percentage o, assessment IN New-York CITY
:, y, mi value Of the property assessed. and we
s-rly believe that the estimate OF ss per cent IS
neral one
-, answer 70 numerous inquiries addressed 70
, state brokers' lawyers and others whose bust
-. -eoul-es familiarity with the prices obtained
.sl,s 81 rea. estate IN New-York City we have
-, -.neatedly assured that. while in a great
,,,-.v O. cases real estate assessed in that
s,r AZ about 50 per cent OF It's fun market value
-. ,n many cases o, large holdings by wealthy as
..,.s and large corporations the average OF
-. would not exceed 40 per cent. And in GER
90, testimony given by ex-Controller Fitch in Sep
go last before commission appointed by ire
Court. as reported IN the NeW-NOrk
~ =, the time he stated with reference to the
10 o, assessments TO prices paid for property
,ors,- ,o- municipal purposes. that ne had known
Is, assessment 10 be 60 per OF real value in
900 cases and !ow 30 per in others.
NEW BUILDINGS SINCE 1880
--Aa cost o, new buildings erected and Of I'm
.rs,ants in New-York City between 1850 and
,ss a. shown BY the estimates filed in the Build
,g nspsrrnsnt. ssS2 So ASS The assessed value
:. - prooerty IN the year 1895 exceeded that Of
80 year $50 by SIS s37 453. showing that the as
sessne1, o. real property in the city OF New-York
. SO Was gA as o32 short OF the estimated cost
=, ,sr hu.ldrgs during that period. without regard
>. -. Increased value OF the land exclusive Of the
bygs,nss 7; IS only fair to say however. that
,bA Tai Commissioners OF New-York assert that
,bs estimates Q: the cost Of buildings and i'm
p-ovements very often exaggerated For the pur-
rose 0. securing larger loans bond and mort
ssse: but on Inquiry al the Office Of the Build
M department, IL was stated that while such
Vas undoubtedly the case as regards a certain
ton yet IN more numerous Instances the estimates
ie short OF the actual cost. and that In striking
an average the total cost would undoubtedly equal
he sum.,otal % the estimates nled
'The rsal estate IN Sew County was eQuaI,
ef 5<sse II IN nv was SS"S yeaTa
q 10 Or "a Per 'enL Ie on; 9taer T., hf ~.
~ sss - and in iss7 at s22H329 $40 an IN
erease Of s. .esS 33s ass or 1865 per cent. II the
eousIize6 value % real estate IN the county OF
Nsw-York had increased IN the same ratio as IN
TIE other counties durng The same peIloi 70 MI
,sSs Der cent Il would have been in 1891 S92+ 80
~ or So2@I 70 more than ne sum AZ Wsl3h II
vas elua,izei IN that year. and there would nave
been added 20 The assessed value the sum OF VIZ
IS so instead OF tie sum OF Ssssss o3 the amount
which was added 20 the local assessment As FAR
back as ls7s there was added 70 the assessnsnt o!
YEAR he sun! u ssl $50 76s SOB SCI 53 more than
ne smount added in 1891, and does any one d9Ios
r he city Of New-York has been greater than II.
other parts OF the state. especially N ve% OF ~, ne
fact that in exclusively Agricultural cEnlh9,s,es
there has been e steady decline IN values during
that period?
COMPARISONS WITH OTHER COUNTIES.
~In $50 TIE assessed value Of real property In the
opv OF Nev-York was s.425 SO. In 1926 II was
sfrv ISic a. Increase during sixteen years OF
s1s'eS7gs or e per cent In Monroe County IN
sv The ASSESSED value OF real estate Was SosloVso'
n lsS Il was 1885 49,: an increase OF Ss,Seo-c'
~ III psr cent In Kings County N 1890 the as-
ssssed value OF real estate SIS l IN; In 1886 IL
was sry NO ee7 an Increase Of 1870 2l25. OF 1856 per
cent In Erie County IN $3.50 the assessed vane 1. q.
az ,rsoresse OF SIS 400 SIS. or ~ per cent Yet
probably most residents OF the lnPe..F' ny -,
s--I3rgsreot would nave been unwilling 70 admit
that there was greater rate OF tsA,io oT
1850 during hat period than IN New-York
we we're repeatedly tod by the Tax commits,
Is, ~ sales OF real estate and essments OF the
sane made ct their instance In the several Go1 ,
ties o. he state in the year 1876, It Wa SHOWN
~ Tew-York city was assessed a. higher per
cottage than the other counties ~ relerehCe
aoSess' ,bat ear 70 the State Board OF Equal
izson We find that that statement Is oy no renv
HrsisDut.d As few instances among nA ny
l--i,- .La uncertainty OF the sales tables We
NV fre.arce the fact hat New orr cav IN, ~
;o-se sales In Chenango county showing an
60 c,.ee over one thousand sales between Juls
IIo-;i3 M fuiv !. iss5. showing an average
-
ssnts tables showing assessment OF 20 PEI 800
Of sales value as asa basement Of that county
steuber County shows - per SEM T on T-is.er
800 h6q,s 81 Der cent as against IS per ceht
S. W. a. used these lists ,or what they ar, are
80. IL, v.or,b and as part OF the evidence take
- -escb ~o1clusions but standing alone theS d. .
sEe misleading aa ous 9s2stH Of ner;
year the average percentage Toy tie - SHOWN TIA
VII Be higa7' aH1 20 fiili value IN NewYork
County has correspondingiy lncFeaSett' ~ iii Ia
% Be added by ne tSat In ISL And such IN
erssse Of ratio in NewYork Is no' indif f, ~ y.
snt IMPROVEMENTS as filed in the o; e. s q =, the BE
par,msnt FOR Buildings for $50 o,rt;
~ ,y ' ease 81 iss in the city OF New-York
s only gSs77 az
PERSONAL TAX DODGERS
In Another mart Of its annual report the COM
mission saws. Tt is q melancholy Tensc"0n '"1'
II this Christian age neither the memory OF eal-
moral training nor present religious profession.
hopes fears for the hereafter me PeH2l'-eS -
the lav nor any other possible cohs''ei
surqcien. N ,e,.a, the average possessor of per
soma prover,v .-orn forcing other men TO nay the
.or which he Is justly liable. by methods un
Cgestionaby oral # not absolute, eT Ihn%.
Tosi ssse5 =. ne e. arc personal property for
~ Ass's 20 Of which 81 S 50 ,r y r there '' s
.Ss1. personal COMPS eeaI and sos O75 30 in
Esrsosa Pro2erty total Of si3 81, 3o go 81 m making
grand io,ai for o tse TWO years Of 4S ~ a O.,
his arge Increase compsrst'yegya 6ilio o 10 the
taxable wea IA Of the state. by far the laIes1 ts
portion being attributed 70 NOR ~ statute
compliance with the requirements VI '-
Ire Commission advises: -...r,enr rolls
First-That the correction OF as,es ,ie, town
and he EQUALIZATION OF assessments Det"S" c,1rer
should DO aiken out OF the hands o. t,ie Nv a
siSo's ana the provisions ior e4u@'~"
Commission BE made compulsory -. o,,oiizafion
second-That a uniform system OF ~ fetrro 10 the