The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-11-02
Friday Evening,
HE PROPOSED TAX. ANdENDNIENs,
T. B. Walker Argues Against It-Afraid to Trust the
Legislature.
Legislature.
The Tax Amendment.

ts5sa s#s. E4 80
Legis
The Tax Amendment. Il N
To the Editor Of The Journal.
The question Of the adoption of
the proposed tax amendment to
our constitution is one that should
receive serious consideration by the
people to far greater extent | than
perhaps of greater, Importance to the
future of the state than any other
amendment to our primary laws, or, if
approved by the people, will have more
influence upon the political, social, in
dustrial and commercial interests Of the
city and state than any legal enact
ment since the state was organized.
L have waited to hear from some Of
its advocates as to what is to be gained
who is to be proited by it--what
manner. of tax laws and principles, or
lack Of principles. they wish and in
tend to have substituted for our pres
ent, system. ~ - (: &, - - ~
. This. amen dment. if carried. will en-
able the legislature to pass any tax laws
which it may choose to enact without
reference to any principles of right or
equality other than the unimportant re-
striction that it must be "uniform
upon the same class Of subjects" This
places it within the power of the Leg
lslature to pass any manner of unjust or
unequal tax laws and there will be no
method. Of appeal if this provision is
adopted as part Of the organic law.
The studied care with which all limi.
tations on the taxing power of the
legislature are :eliminated-an reference
to- equality, fairness or uniformity
seems to Indicate that such principles
were not intended. to prevail in our flu
ture tax system Otherwise there is no
reason for striking out all limitations,
The prospective outcome of this will
be tax laws more radical, unfair. I'M
equal and unsatisfactory than our pres
ent system.
This move seems to have originated
with, or has been encouraged by some
of our business men and associations
here in Minneapolis and elsewhere. The
socialists and single takers and some
OF the large corporate interests are
favoring it., The people generally have
seemingly not paid much attention to it.
Many Of our citizens have been preju-
diced against our tax laws for being
administered to the disadvantage of
the city and its. general interests-for
excessive valuations being placed on
our city property above those in 9TH
er parts Of the state, thru which the
taxpayers have been. called upon to
pay more than their share of the state
taxes, while at the same time the bust
ness men have been inexcusably at
tackled as tax shirkers from which a
prejudice has developed against the city
thru the state.
There has been much complaint Of
of taxation" and Of it's Inequality Of
application to different classes of, citi-
zens and property, especially here in
Minneapolis. And upon this presump-
ton many persons are possessed with
the idea that a radical change Of this
kind will enable the legislature, thru
the presumed advice, counsel OF. infu-
ence of each of the different classes, all
recommending different and opposite,
radical and conflicting changes, to Sc
cure tax laws which will be more sat
isfactory to them. -.
The most general complaint as to our
present laws is based upon the difficult
ty or inability or indisposition to make
a fair uniform assessment Of personal
property-that as a matter Of fact per-
at least not in the manner or methods
now in practice. ~ !:
They would eliminate from taxation
mortgages, credits, moneys, stocks,
bonds, ETC., and rely upon putting the
weight Of taxation upon real estate and
its Improvements and public utility cor
porations and an income tax.
On the contrary others are seeking
to enlarge the range Of personal tax
assessments. One Of the most emphat-
ic and authoritative complaints, re-
peated frequently, is that large num-
bers of people here in the city have
deposits in the savings banks and other
ennahg $40 oo sm 1"n to
should be taxed, and thru the agency Of
would follow, enable them to reach this
large amount of personal property.
And altho aware Of the fact that 1t Is
the savings and balances almost entire
~ Of the smaller property owners; yet
there should nevertheless be means of
reaching it. This would not in any
manner indicate desire to relieve'per-
sonal property Of taxation.
The tax amendment itself also would
indicate the same thing. This pro-
vides that "there may be exempted
from taxation personal property not
exceeding in value 5000 for each house
hold, Individual or head Of family, as
the legislature may determine'' On
IHe cOnGIaiy tue present. CONSTITUTION
provides that "personal property to an
amount not exceeding in value 5000 for
each individual, shall by general laws
be exempted from taxation" ~: =
The reason assigned for this change
is that from reports of former tax
commission and other sources: it is
found that very extended custom pre-
walls Of securing exemption for, many
times the 5000 limitation by claiming
that the property is owned by different
members Of the household to such ex-
tent that when added to the under
valuations, allowed in families by the
assessor, the larger part Of the smaller
personal property holdings are exempt
ed from taxation to the extent Of many
times the amount intended by the, law.
For this reason it was left for the legis-
lature to refuse all exemption if so de-
termined, or to pass such rigid restric-
tions and limitations as to family or
household ownership and as to valua-
tions that advantage could not be TAX
en-. of this clause. II: - ~. = Z
* The provision with reference to ex-
emption of "church property is al
ready resulting in conflict Of opinion
from restricted views and the general
Indebtedness and vagueness of this
provision. -. '.;..;.l
H. Orr nresent constitution nrovidas tbo