The Appeal. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. ;) 1889-19??, 1906-10-13


The purpose and effect of this
amendment would be to greatly en-
large the power of the legislatufe
with reference to the subject OF
taxation. Section one (I as 1T now
stands provides that all taxes fm-
posed shall be equaI-as near as may
be-on all forms of property, and all
property upon which tax IL 1m-
posed Is required to have a CASH
VALUATION equalized throughout
the state.
section two as 1T now stands re-
quires the legislature to levy the
necessary taxes annually to de1ray
the expenses of the state. That IL
the duty of the Legislature W1tnout
any constitutional direction.
Section three as it now stands pro-
vides that all real and personal
property, including MONEYS, CHED-
ITS and INVESTMENTS IN BONDS
AND STOCKS, shall be assessed ac-
cording to their true value IN
money.
Section four as 1T now stands pro-
vfdes that property employed In
banking shall be subject to tax
equal to that imposed on Other
property. This is only a repetition
of the requirements of Sections one
and three, as no rational person
would claim that banking capital
Section seventeen as 1T now stands
is not easy to understand, but 1T was
intended by that section to reneVe
from the operation of sections one
and three, above quoted, property
of the classes therein enumerated,
so TINT q gross earnings tax could
be applied thereto instead OF d1rect
taxation.
Owing to the provisions of sec
lions one and three of the present
Constitution many amendments
were from time to time added SO as
to permit taxes to be imposed on
specific kinds of property Other-
wise than upon cash valuation
equalized throughout the state. we
have among these exceptions rail-
road gross earnings taxes; mun1c1-
pal frontage taxes; Inheritance
taxes; and the gross earnings taxes
authorized by said section seven
teen.
Several exemptions from taxation
are also provided for, but as these
exemptions are not changed by the
proposed amendment, I Will make
no further reference to them.
The amendment which, if adopted,
would take the place of all of the
sections and amendments above re-
ferred to, is simple and plain. NO
provision of the Constitution Is
necessary to authorize the I'M
.
the support of the state and Its
various political subdivisions. The
power of taxation is inherent in
government. This proposed amend
ment declares that this inherent
power of taxation shall never be
surrendered, suspended Or con-
tracted away; that taxes shall be
imposed for public purposes and
shall be uniform ON the same class
of subjects. Should this amend
ment be adopted all property of
every kind in the state would be
subject to taxation, according to
the method the legislature saw fit
to adopt, provided only that the
tax WAS levied for Il public purpose
and was uniform on the same class
of subjects. Under this amendment
every tax law we now have on the
statute books would continue to be
valid, because under this amend
ment all limitations on the power
of the legislature would be taken
away. .
The adoption of this amendment
would, as indicated, repeal the So
called inheritance tax amendment,
and the grOss-earninSs tax amend
ment adopted in 1896 contained
in said section seventeen, but in
their place this amendment would
give the legislature greater author
ity. Under this amendment the
power to impose inheritance taxes
would be unlimited, and any form
of gross earnings tax would be
valid. The gross earnings tax on
railroads would not be affected by
this amendment, as the Constitution
provides that it can not be changed
without vote of the people. But
with this amendment various new
forms of taxation could be imposed,
notably an income tax and a regis
try tax on mortgages. Under the
present Constitution we can impose
no tax on mortgages owned by nom
residents. A registry tax, which
would be valid under this amend
ment, would reach all mortgages
alike. While all subjects of taxa
ton are required to have a cash
valuation with the tax equalized
throughout the state, no proper In
come tax could be imposed. Such q
tax, If imposed, should be pro-
gressive, which would be valid
under this amendment.
SECOND PROPOSED AMENDMENT.