The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-06-09
MUST PAY TAX ON PRO RATA
PART OF CAPITAL STOCK

man vs. Telephone Co., 126 n. G.. S3l, so
far as Jurisdiction is concerned.
AS to matters affecting taxation, it
makes no difference whether it is a
North Carolina corporation or not.
Whether domesticated here or not the
business and operations here are practi-
cally a part of the larger corporation
doing business in several States. Mo-
rawetz Corp, sections 1874. 996; and
therefore as repeatedly held in the Uni
ted States Supreme Court, whenever a
tax upon the capital stock of corporations
is laid ''such proportion of the whole
value of its capital stock as the length
of it's lines within the State bears to the
length of it's lines anywhere" can be
taxed as capital stock in this State.
Western Union Telegraph Co. VS.. Tag
CART, 1913 U. S., /. As our statute directs
the value of it's tangible property to be
deducted, the sum of $4,000, the value
of the defendants tangible property in
this State should be deducted from the
proportion of the valuation of the whole
capital stock which by ABOVE rule should
be proportional to this State and the
difference should be taxed in this State
as capital stock The above rule was
reafirmed in Adams Express Company
VS.. Ohio. 165 U. s., 1884, and same vs..
Kentucky, 166 U. s., III. Upon a re-
hearing of the former case Adams Elk
press Company VS.. Ohio, 166 U. S., 1S5,
the point was most deliberately and ably
argued as may be seen from the briefs
and the above doctrine again repeated
and conclusively in an opinion in an
unanimous court by MIR. Justice Brewer.
In that case it is held whatever prop
erty is worth for the purpose of income
and sale it is worth for the purposes of
taxation, and when, as in the case of the
Express Company the tangible property
of the corporation is scattered through
different States by means of which its
business is transacted in each, the situs
of this intangible property is not simply
where its home office is, but is dis
tributed, wherever its tangible property
is located and it's work is done" 1t was
also held that mo fine spun theories
about situs should interfere to enable
those large corporations whose business
is of necessity carried on through many
States, from bearing in each State such
burden of taxation as fair distribution
of the actual value of the property among
these states requires. Hence In the
Ohio case a tax of 1888 095.S5 of capital
stock was sustained, though the corpora
ton had only $42,06 real and personal
property in that State. In the Kentucky
case tax of 81, 463.040 as the fair proper
tion of it's capital stock taxable in the
State was sustained, though the corpora
tion had only $36,614.53 of tangible prop
erty within that State, 166 U. S., bottom
of page 172 Where the Legislature
ARBITRARILY fixed the proportion of the
capital stock of a corporation operating
in several States, which should pay
taxes in that State. it was upheld.
Minot VS.. r. R., s. U. S., 206.
Under our statute. the assessment of
the capital stock should be made by the
Corporation Commissioners and not by
the county commissioners. This objec-
ton is not made by exception below nor
by motion here, but it is a defect of
which we can take notice ex moro motu.
While therefore, we must dismiss the
action, we have passed upon the point,
as the party interested desires us to do
SO by not having objected and it is a
matter of public interest.
Milling Company VS.. Finlay, Ito n c.,
All; S. V. Wylde ID, 500.
Action dismissed