The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-03-27
.rssER71DAY. MARCH q, 1903,
T'l,HEsrloRTGAGE TAX.

Il which has been time and again dlscusseo
n these columns, and which Is one OF
s tie most interesting phases Of the entlre
tax system. The amendment provides
that "n listing tracts and lots OF land
md the improvements thereon for taxa
ton, the amount Of any mortgage or
deed OF trust, or the balance OF any
amount due as the purchase prlco thereof,
shall be deducted from the value of any
n such ira ct or lot Of land and the improve
4 ments thereon, {. and any such mortgage
deed of trust or amount due on the pur-
chase price on same, shall be listed TOT
taxation against the holder thereof, 81 /.
under the present law, man owning g
House and lot or tract Of land upon
which he has made o. partial payment,
q ind upon which there Is mortgage to
secure the balance due, must pay on the
full assessed value of the property, and
IN addition the person who holds the
mortgage must pay on the mortgage, or,
10 DO exact, on the estate secured by the
& mortgage or course, tho creditor charges
II enough interest to cover the tax which
Is he has to pay, and SO, after all the land
SsFholder pays taxes on the entire property
ard on the debt. The whole thing Is as
unfair as it can be, and some remedy
II should be found to relieve the land-holder.
n S4 In order to bring tho question fairly
& before the reader. let us suppose a case.
A owns d lot in the city OF Richmond,
Y for which he has paid. We Will suppose
Il that the lot Is worth $1,000 , has .. Co.,
uron which he has been paying taxes as
& So much money In hand. A applies to B
81 for loan, and y agrees to lend the
money. provided A will erect house to
cost IS 900 and give him q mortga on
IL the entire property ID then draws his
rroncy from bank and turns It over to
a, and A erects a house costing 5000, and
fhe whole property 10 then assessed at
5000,
5fs: II viii be observed that the property
which has been created Is the house. b
has simply converted SO much money into
s., much brick and mortar. But under
cur system II is held that property has
u been created in tho mortgage and so not
pnly is A assessed on the house and lot,
Z but B Is assessed on the mortgage. It Is
perfectly plain that this Is double taxa
ton. 1t is held that B's mortgage Is 80
y much property, but it is not. 1t simply
represents a debt; 1t simply represents
tho money which B formerly had in hand
and which he has turned over to A. If
A pays the tax on the house and lot of
course should DO exempt. 1t Is not
right that both should pay on the same
amount. 5a
Senator Barksdale's amendment te
founded on the right principle. IN point
"A Of fact: 1.-The house and lot In the ilustra-
i ton are the joint property of A and 3
In point Of fact a owns the lot and I
owns the house. and so In fairness a
should be made to pay taxes on the lot
and b on tho house. But while this
amendment is founded on good principle
1t is. in our opinion, utterly impracticablt
& and would lead to all sorts Of abuses
Il. 1t would. we believe. create large mum
beers Of Straw mortgages and open thu
door TO fraud. More than that. 1t would
ba an injustice to the State, 1t would
put The Slate 10 great trouble to get thu
revenue which belongs to her. and IL
do not see how tho State could get he
tevenue at all except by resort to heroic
measures. 1t has been suggested that tn,
state could got her revenue by pre-cmpt
ing the interest which the land-holder pay
TO tho foreign debtor. but such process
would be open 10 manifest objection, an
eyen II 1t were practicable and allowable
1t would undoubtedly tend to make tn
interest ratio higher. or more probably
would prevent outside capital from seek
Ing investment in Virginia.
There is but one safe course for tn
state to pursue, and that is to lay h0
hands on all property-al actual, tangibl
property--in the State and tax It ono
and only once. When the State undN
takes TO lay It's hands upon that which
not property. but which merely represent
properly. and tax it, she gets into a
sorts OF difficulties
This paper has been very much cor
deynned for proposing that mortgages >
exempt from taxation. But those wi,
5 take full and fair view OF the subjet
Irus1 see that Our contention is RICH
q When man lends his money 10 HI
yIcighbor. and the neiglbor pays the ia
for him. the lender is In all fairness ea
empi. But We are not championing III
Cause OF the monsy lender Our confer
ton Is that tho only possible relief fc
ttct1and- holder whose land is mortgage
Is 10 exempt tho mortgage. and so b
competition among money lenders TO II
apcs the rate OF Interest, Ons OF til
largest builders IN Richmond recently ds
clared that no could borrow money
this city for building purposes for fo'
per cent, against tire and six per cen
Is mortgages were exempt from taxalio
ANY person who will look over The adye
tlsing columns Of this paper Wlll see III
NJ Aiaxno q re larPa peIliIlS of money in RIG