The Virginia enterprise. [volume] (Virginia, St. Louis County, Minn.) 1893-19??, 1903-03-13
Tax. Commissions Estimate Of Market
/. Vaire Of Personal Property in Wisconsin.
1t Was Based on a False Assumption.
The Commission Cut Dow the
va'ua ion OF the Local Assessors. Y

r. was odSeO OF a raise R09umptlOOs
f. The Commission Cut Down the
va'ua ion OF the Local Assessors. y
ISSUED in Behalf ct Wisconsin Railways, 4,
In the preceding article We discussed the
Of apS co' Eom1nl Isii report 1 of stthae,ttGlu th1 Sal 'ts
estimate was very much less than the
census returns. We shall next consider the
true value OF personal property. But be-
commissions, estimates of the true value OF
the personal property in Wisconsin we
snail state. largely In the commissions "
mates. -:
On page &C of it's first biennial report the
niaH &c om nh1s y very briefly explains the
sGLal property. Speaking Of it's own acts
ne commission said: I'm their complta'
lions the commission first calculated TIE
ing the average ratio of assessed valuation
70 actual value shown by real estate In
each assessment district lit was deemed a
TAU presumption that the assessor applied
10 personal property, or that part of it dis
covered by him, the same ratio that he ap-
piled to real estate). then adding the total
ti1ct for five years and taking an average
or that and applying to it the real estate
Stated in other words the commission arbi-
rrarlly increased the values Of personal
property liked by the local assessors in the
same ratio that it had already increased the
SSA NoiaLC LlACA - lhC CLAW
iocal assessors. The commission assumed
mat only the same degree of under-valua-
o,on prevailed in the case of personal prop
crty that the commission had found to exist
IN inc case of real estate. For example, If
thc average assessment for five years of the
personal property Of a certain assessment
mission had previously found that the real
estate of this district for the same five
years had been assessed at but one-half it's
!rue value. the commission would double the
local assessment Of $4,000 TO get it's So
called true. value of the personal property
or tho district.
1he persona! property Of the state can be
round in this way. First, because we be-
l,eve assessors: undcr-valuc personal prop
especially in large cities, and. secondly, be-
cause they find practically all Of the real
,Se ncr Wh1iG they n"one iind but Wh a small part Of
Llon the commission comedies In a measure
inr IT says 1T was deemed 4 FAIR PRE-
SIMpTloN that thc assessor applied to
HlScOVERED BY HIM. the same ratio
mat ne applied to real estate" In making
mad not made this admission.
we protest against the rough and ready
method adopted by the commission for find.
ing the true value of the personal property
In the state: and we insist that the esti-
mates of the commission are not a safe
guide for action. The whole controversy
Of whether or not the railroads are paying
1884 cA"A " NAS "CICAIuS Il1lOS eli
tirely gu the valuations placed on the other
property In the state and We shall not allow
to go unchallenged the Tax Commissions
estimate Of the value of personal property
based entirely on a "~presumption'' which
neither appeals to common sense nor finds
any support In experience.
The half-hearted attempt of the commits
sion to discover the personal property which
every one knows escapes taxation is to say
the least both surprising and disappointing
for here lay it's greatest field for usefulness.
and tho position OF the commission Is not at
all strengthened by the apology it makes
for it's failure to grapple with tho problem
or getting personal property on the assess.
we have now stated the assumption on
mate of the true value Of the personal prop
erty In Wisconsin and we have also present
ed some objections to Its methods Of valua-
ton and have called attention to the utter
In the discharge of this. Its most important |
task. Having discussed it's methods we are
now free to discuss the statistical matter
submitted by the commission.
1t requires; but q very superficial cxamina-
gtion of the Valuations made by the local as
SCISSORS and those made by the Tax Com
thing radically wrong with the method Of
valuation adopted by the latter. wherever
a local assessor made an encrt 70 find the
able to discover much more of this class Of
propert? than the commission would ac-
knowledge 10 the district Contained: In its
hAcC VIVA ~ az az SStI-
mate which it raised 500. 24,. 253 in its sec
ond report. Of the total value Of the per-
so nal property in the =, stats +: +,o
ties at the state have discovered and as
scssed much more Of this class of property
tn e1,t ths Tax SSmm 1fsstonu Mls! t ne4 fnct to }n 1f
the local assessors have actually found the
property the commission, still refuses to he
turns Of personal property were higher than
Its own estimates the commission scaled
down the assessors returns until they were
It has calmly taken the position that il the
facts conflict with the theory it has an
nounced; or more accurately the presump-
the facts. The Tax Commission has prac-
personal property in the different counties
procrustes, the tabled highwayman Of
Atticn, who is said to have reduced his
of all those whom he found too long for
the bed he had prepared.
We do not believe the local assessors over
valued the property Of their constituents
ut the last assessment. Such a mctamor-
phosis Of the assessors is not conceivable,
It would be fully as easy s,y to believe the
Ethiopian his skin. Even the highest re.
turns made by the local assessors fall short
ct lie full value Of the property in thelr,
We can sec no ground on which the COM
mission was justified in scaling down the |
valuations Of the local assessors of So Of |
the Il counties Of the state by the large |
sum Of $45. los. 1872. 1t would be interest |
Ing to hear from the Tax Commission as to
the basis on which 1t reduced the assess |
ment of the personal property of Ashland |
assessment Of personal property in Chip. !
pewa county from S5,O93, O97 to 81. 265, 2OS.; |
and the assessment of the personal property
in Grant County from 5000. 897 to S.
465. sG3 and the assessment Of the personal;
property In Waupaca county from ST. 322, 800 !
to $2,35S, 5?2.