Graham guardian., 1905-03-03
A BULLION TAX

by Mr.. Kruger, OF Maricopa
County and the other by Mr.
Wilson, of Pima County. This
paper has never been an advocate
of bullion tax law, although
h Artily in favor of it. We have
7 advocated it for the reason
that we knew of no way by which
bullion tax could be made to
apply and still maintain equity
between tax payers, and we frank
ly admit that while, it is our opin
ion that the present bills might be
put together and so amended as
to cover the grounds, yet we are
not much more enlightened now
than we were before.
Mr.. Wilson's bill provides for
the assessment of all the property
of mining companies in just the
same manner that it is now assess
ed and then assesses the gross out
put of mines the same as other
property is assessed. There is
nothing particularly wrong with
this as the producers either have
the miteral on hand or the cash
for it, and all property is assess
able, even the products of the
farm. But the great objection to
the bill is that 1T would not be
practicable to carry out its provis-
ions. The assessor must assess
the property, enter the returns
on the assessment roll monthly
and make his return to the board
monthly. The board must meet
and equalize the return and levy |
tax each month, thus compelling |
the board to be in almost con-
tinuous session and placing work
upon the assessor that would take
all his time if he properly attends
to the duties imposed. So far as
carrying out its provisions the
Kruger bill is preferable.
The Kruger bill provides that
one mill shall be levied on every
pound of copper produced, 10
cents on each ounce of golt, four
mills on each ounce of silver and
four mills on each one hundred
pounds of lead, This tax shall
be in lieu of all other tax or the
mines or mining claims but does
not cover the machinery, buildings
or material necessary for the
operation of mines. The tax thus
levied would, perhaps, not be out
of proportion with a great deal of
the property Of the territory as
taxed at the pesent time, but
would be out of all proportion
to the taxes paid by the railroads,
and in some instances on live
stock. In great many instances
there would be no equality be-
tween the mining companies I
themselves. |,
The Arizona Copper Company
produces about 4O,O0O,OOO pounds
of copper annually. This, at one I
mill per pound, would produce a t
revenue of 10000, in round num-
bers. At Is cents per pound, I
which is about the price of copper /
at the present time, would give the |
company gross revenue of So
100000 per annum, Allowing s I
cents per pound for cost of produc- I
tion and placing the product upon G
the market would leave a net |
revenue from their copper produc- q
lion alone of s4,O00,OO0. This f
at present pays about t
$500 on machinery etc, meet
ID with the operation of its mines, q
which together with the bullion /
tax would make q total revenue b
rom this company on its mines I
Ind other property necessary for Q
heir operation about $4,000. b
These figures do not include stores o
md other property that are wealth v
,reating within themselves. Ifthe n
should produce more or il
ess copper their taxes would in. Il
,rease or diminish accordingly. d
As between mining companies s
in inequality would exist. As we b
,ave been using the Arizona Cop Il
Der Company as an example we h
will continue to do so. For in Il
tance, the Arizona produces about Il
1879 more copper than the De- a
roit Company, of Morenci.