The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-09-10
ONE STEP IN TAXATION

We are not SO bold as to attempt
what the best minds of all time have
failed to accomplish by outlining a
reasonable, just and revenue preduc-
ing system of taxation We do not even
profess to solve the problem of how to
catch elusive personal property or to
secure a just contribution from it for
the state. Step by step we must pro-
coed, and each dilemma as it is solved
will give us only one hint for the fu-
ture.
|, The board Of equalization is now
struggling with a condition and not a
theory. 1t finds the personal property
valuation OF the state as returned by
the county assessors cut down $780,
600 below the amount last year. 1t
finds the need of the state for revenue
increased instead Of diminished In
order to avoid a very heavy increase in
the tax rate on real property this deficit
must be made good. Consequently, the
equa1izers are scurrying- around, rails
ing lids and peering into corners to
find some of the sequestered property
which they have reason to believe ex-
lists. For that the value Of personal
property has fallen off to this amount
| within the last twelve months nobody
for a moment believes. On the con-
trary, it has probably, with the growth
Of the community and the general av-
erage of prosperity, increased consid-
>erably elsn :. %
We think that first step toward
cutting some of these knots and solv-
ing the big riddle might be made if all
taxation were placed upon the basis
directed by the constitution Of the state
itself. We believe that the theory of
assessment which values property,
either real or personal, at only a frac-
ton Of its actual worth is false. We
are aware of the difficulties in applying
any other rule. The actual value of
property is fuctuating. A tract of land
or a bundle of stock certificates valued
and actually salable for $4,000 today
may not be worth more than rs per
cent of that amount thirty days hence
Taxation based on value at the time
time of collection of payment. But is
not exactly the same thing true if the
property is assessed on a valuation of
so per cent or 80 per cent? The ratio
Of injustice is the same, and the injus-
tice itself is unacceptable by any device
Of undertaking.
Older and larger and richer commu-
mites than this have come to this po-
sition. The argument In favor of it is
that there is a far greater opportunity
for injustice and for favoritism in a
system which returns property at only
a portion Of its actual value than in
one which puts it down for it's full
worth. The latter is at least something
sonable limits. When you come to fic-
titious valuations, to cutting off so
much from this man and so much from
that on account of differing conditions
all regularity disappears, and it be-
comes in great degree matter of pri-
vate Judgment and undoubtedly some
times of private influence
Property, of course, will pay no more
when it is all valued at its face than
when it is all discounted If every
body's assessed valuation is raised. the
total grows proportionately and the
present system is that each county is
fearful lest some other county get-an
advantage. If Hennepin county can
| get through lower valuation than
Ramsey, then its wealth will have to
| pay less to the state, and vice versa.
Every county is jealous lest it pay more
than its share, and the whole tendency
is to create valuations below their
| proper line by perfectly inevitable
business competition. If the assess
ment of all property were raised to
full value and this rule were obliged to
be applied in every county in the state
| by local assessors and enforced by the
state board. we are convinced that the
taxation problem would be just that
much simplified and the tax made that
| much more equitable. It would not be
a. solution, but we think 1t would be a
step toward it.