Willmar tribune., 1900-10-31
GROSS EARNINGS BILL.

L WluO 1dul.
GROSS EARNINGS BILL.
In his inaugural message to the last
legislature, Governor Lind urged the
passage Of gross earnings tax bill,
and backed up his recommendations
with the strongest facts and figures
He urged that the tax on the gross
earnings of railroads be raised from
three to four per cent, and there GER
tainly was every reason in the world
for making such raise. In fact this
raise of from 3 to per cent. was more
than conservative.
There is hardly a state in the Union
where the railroads do not pay higher
taxes than in Minnesota. In Mime
sofa the tax on the gross earnings of
railroads is only three per cent, while
in other states it is 4, and 6, and in
Kansas it is even IL per cent. But
Governor Lind knew that with the Re-
publican majority in the legislature
there would be no possibility of Sc
curing any such raise; therefore, he
merely asked what might seem pos
sible, what nobody could have any
reason to refuse, what was so Just and
so imperatively necessary that nobody
would be justified in opposing it, viz,
a raise Of from per cent. to per
cent
If the railroads in Minnesota were
taxed as other property, and paid the
usual rate of tax on so per cent. of
market value, their taxes in this state
would treble. In other words, the
statistics show that other property
owners pay three times the taxes in
proportion to value that the railroads
pay. The market value of the rail-
roads within the State of Minnesota
as shown from the railroad statistics
is $289, ,122,941. II this market value
were assessed like other property at
so per cent. and taxed like other prop
erty at the rate of 24.6 mills, it would
have to pay $3.50, ,210 of taxes. where
as the railroads actually pay less than
one-third that sum, viz, only $1,127,-
$50. The net earnings for the rail-
roads of Minnesota for the year were
1850 SOB. which would be per cent.
on an investment of $314,O00, 900,
which the railroad property was well
worth. Assessed and taxed like other
property. the railroads would have
yielded S3,862,00O of taxes instead of
the $1,127,950, which they actually
paid.
The gross earnings of railroads in
Massachusetts, amounted to Sal AIS, ,991,
and were taxed by that state $3,527,-
820. The gross earnings of railroads
in Minnesota were nearly the same,
viz, $40,008,702, yet they were taxed
less than one-third as much, VIZ,
$1,127,950. By being thus favored in
the matter of taxation, the railroads
escaped paying some $2,400,000 OF
taxes, and consequently other tax pay
ers were called upon to- contribute so
much more heavily towards paying
the states expenses, and make up that
which the railroads escaped paying.
The taxes of the six leading rail-
roads of Minnesota - are one-third
lighter within this state than they are
for their entire lines; at the same time
the transportation rates charged in
Minnesota are for the most part nota-
bly, higher, and were flagrantly higher
until, the present board Of railroad
commissioners secured reductions in
freight rates, which nave saved the
farmers Of certain parts of the state
more than 100000 a year. ,.e.:-. rs.
= Republican rule and Republican
PesAuSAA6 " AoAAO0u .1utCl CSt0 :" IuuS
robbed the people of Minnesota at
both ends Of the railway proposition.
First, by permitting the roads to
charge higher freight and passenger
rates than are charged on the same
lines in other states South and East
second, by taxing the railroad prop
erty only one-third as high as other
property. and thus putting on the
shoulders Of the people at large, the
burdens which the railroads evaded
It is therefore plain to everybody that
this is q question Of great interest to
every tax payer in the state and that
it concerns every tax payer IN the
state very deeply to secure the kind OF
men that will force the railroads to
bear their honest share of the burden
|of taxation, and not force the people
at large to pay taxes three times as
high as those Of the great railway
corporations. Oh ss
When the gross earnings tax bill
was introduced it received the uniyerr-
sal, undivided, and emphatic approval
Of the people Of the state. From Jan.
LIST to April .seeth, the press Of the state
regardless Of party aff1liation, with
hardly q dissenting voice. emphatical-
" demanded It's passage. &
The state consti tuition demands
enna1N fAYatinnsS md IT anansnd din rmlf