The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1903-09-01
TAXATION AND CONFIsC4TIoE.

rate Il S--sN. ItAk -. S-rFH Oh az 4Fer
FIRST example 4 man owns sl.coQ. he
1t at per cent. the legal rate rs
assumes the RISK in this loan. lie re-
ceives $4,000. 1t which ne pays III taxes
$4,000. leaving him only $500 a. Ms
share. S24.oo Is 40 per cent. Of $4,000. Tul>
tax. therefore moun 10 10 per cent
OF the income Of the person
40 political party could levy such .
tax directly and survive an election.
But this Is not the end OF the matter.
This rate OF s. 10 covers only State,
county and city tax. The United States
takes her share out Of the $500.
.poud example Houses Nos IL arc
IL Polk street: These houses rent Tor
s1c.66 per month. or 5000 each per year.
They were appraised at 200 each, On
What ground no one knows. They are
now appraised at $1,000 each. The tax
rate j, $2f.C0 per thousand or $500 on
each house. This leaves s12s.00 as the
income from one house, or 5000 per
month. The tax collectors receive $500
pei, month. Their $500 j. certain, while
the owners 5000 i not only subject 10
less by difficulty IN obtaining tenants,
but from this prccarIous 5000 the owner
must pay repairs, Insurance and improve.
nonts.
have authority, by the way. TO sell
to any Of our tax assessors or any Nom.
Ter OF the Board Of County Commission
ers either or these houses, valued 10y them
at s3,CC0. for 81, 800. And | THINK $4,000
a good price. This offer Is made IN
good faith. In fact, according TO the
appraisal OF this property and q piece 81
his own, | can give one Of the appraisers
quite a bargain IN a swap.
Example number three: \ widow re-
celves from her husbands will 500, 600.
She invests it at s per cent-tho best she
can do. She gets Sc, 900. 90. She pays the
tax collectors out of this 50. 4oo-lcaving
her only SO. 600. 90. With this she must
pay attorney fees, Withstand losses, etc,
etc. Evidently the tax collectors receive
in net money from her property nearly as
much as she does.
Example number four: a house on
Blount street is appraised at $4,000. Our
appraisers put it higher, but Il was re-
duced to this sun 1t rents tor $4,000.
The tax on it is $28S. The rent Is 1915.
This leaves the owner only $22S on her
S12, coo property; and with this she must
keep it IN repair; keep 1t insured pant
II. etc. She receives, therefore, PRAGUE
ally nothing for it. Taxation that de
stroys the p~rofit-paylng power OF a piece
OF property Is confscation, no more and
no less.
I think | am justified by the introduce
tory to the latest report of the North
Carolina Tax Commission g.. G., the Cor
poration Commission IN saying that 4
tax rate of S2.4O on the money value Of
a piece of property is conhscatory and
cannot be collected. l refer the reader
to that report.
am also justified by the foregoing ac-
tual example in saying that the recent
appraisal Of property IN Raleigh Is as un-
just as the taX-rate is oppressive.
]. w. BAILEY.
1.-THE question Of the tax-rate has moth
ing whatever to do with the assessment.
1t is the sworn duty of the assessors to
put the property on the textbooks at It's
same in Rhamkatte, where the tax ate
is two-thirds less than it is in Raleigh,
as in Raleigh where the very high rate
OF s2.40 prevails. Mr.. Bailey gives four
says are over-valued. We printed yester-
day the record of seven pieces Of prop
erty, sold in Raleigh since the assess
mcnt, that We're undervalued One piece.
IS some property assessed too hight
ought to be reduced. There is some prop
erty assessed too low-it ought to be
increased. But the fact remains that
dred the assessment is below the true
value in money" If the law ought to
take into consideration the question as
to net income from property, raised
by Mr.. Bailey, let him agitate to change
the law, instead Of reflecting upon of
lcials who took an oath to make assess
ments in accordance with the law. II the
assessors were guilty of favoritism, as has
rected. Any favoritism in assecment IS
wronging every taxpayer whose property
is assessed at its true value.
With reference to Mr.. Bailcy's figures as
lends out either s., 900 or 800, 600. it is
only necessary to say, according to Mr..
Bailey's statements, that there is next to
Nc money loaned out in Raleigh if we arr
to judge from the textbooks. If people IN
Raleigh have solvent credits, they do not
appear on the textbooks, for Mr.. Bailey
says the solvent credits aggregate only
s1,818.18. Is he not mistaken in thcs
figures. We need not waste sympathy
on the heavy taxes widows pay on money
loaned when the tax lists show that they
do not pay it,
The tax assessment in Raleigh is Meth
er unjust, unfair nor confscatory. though
It IS not perfect or free from INEQUALITIES.
From Mr.. Bailey's letter, it appears he
IS Directing chiefly to the high rate In
Raleigh. In that position he is right.
With the increased assessment Of prop
erty, the county commissioners and city
aldermen can both decrease the rate. II
IL l. Fo11 A..