The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1907-12-30

4AxG = w ~
accrjDu5ation. This will be a direct
| benefit to real estate. Land has great
est value upon which personal prop.
erty of greatest vnlue can be induced
| to locate. This Is demonstrated by
the fact that In those counties where
custom, wiser and stronger than the
law, has permitted the greatest eva
Increase in. the value of real estate Is
greatest. The per cent Of gain In the
valuation of real estate from 1852 to
1906 in the counties named has been:
Per Cent of Total
Tax Paid by
Personal Prop
Real Estate erty.
County. Per Ct. Per CT. Per Ct.
Adams ....... 439 2sS 25.7
Brown ........ 2s2 22.S 252
Cuyahoga -. 1880 3S 20.6
Franklin ..... 1855 3S 20.3
Lucas ....... 37G7 81 20.3
Montgomery ..,1s22 s22S 22.7
1t will be observed that the per cent
OF Increase in the value of real estate
Is greatest In counties where the eva
sion of taxation on intangible per.
sonal property is practiced most eff
fectively, and where there Is the
greatest development of public ser
vice corporation property.
1t being true that high tax rate
decreases, and low tax rate IN
creases, revenue from personal prop.
erty, the policy of undertaking real
estate is extremely unwise. This is
demonstrated by the high tax rate in
the counties shown to be undervalued
II the valuation of all real estate on
the grand duplicate Of the counties
investigated should be Increased by
the per cent which the transferred
real estate is shown to be underval-
ued, the increased valuation with the
valuation of personal property un.
changed) would result in decrease
OF the tax rate as follows:
Valuation Pate
County. p. CT. p. CT
Adams. present valua.
Adams, full valuation. 100 Isl
Brown, present valua.
Brown. full valuation. 100 i.i5
Monroe, present valua-
ucn ................. 3G.7 229
Monroe, full valuation. 100 1.10
Montgomery, present
valuation ............ 37.1 2G1
Montgomery, full valua-
tlon ................. lOO LII
II is clear from this statement that
to evade a part of just share Of tax.
alton OF real estate by undorvaluation
Is unwise, and causes owners to be
losers instead of gamers. They arc
not only Obliged to pay about the
same amount of taxes through an In.
creased rate on a decreased valuation,
but they pay an increased portion OF
the total tax through decreasing the
revenue derived from personal prop.
erty. caused by the depressing infu
ence Of high rate.
Growth Of Taxation.
The growth OF the grand duplicate
and OF taxes paid state and local, from
lows:
Per ct.
Grand duplicate. increase ...... 341
keal estate valuation, increase. 32S
ID Personal property valua-
Taxes paid on real estate, In. ''0
(p Taxes paid on personal '''
property, increase ....... .1019
Population. increase. 1850-100O. 1899
(1) These figures include the per.
sonal property valuation and taxes
| paid by public service corporations.
| Growth Of Taxation and Population.
For state purposes, increase, 1856
1896, 124 per cent; 1896-l90j 55.3 per
cent; ratio of increase second over
first period. 3459 per cont.
| For local purposes, increase, 1896.
| 1896, l2.4 per cent; 1S9C-190G, 5J.3 per
cent; ratio OF increase second over
first period, 1853 per cent.
| Population. increase, 1S80-1890, 14.8
per cent: lS90'1900. 1872 per cent; de-
| The unsound economic policy OF at
tempting. to abolish the general prop
erty tax for state purposes through Sc
| curing all needed state revenue from
| special taxation was entered upon BY
the state OF Ohio by the enactment
OF a law assessing an excite tax. so
called, on the gross earnings of public
| service corporations. In 1909 the Cole
law was enacted increasing this ex.
cise tax. 100 per cent. increase In the
/ rate being from one-half to one per
cent; the Willis law was enacted at
| the same time, assessing tax of one.
| tenth of one per cent on the capital
stock Of business corporations and
taking for state purposes all revenue
derived from the taxation Of life and
tSe tire naHnra, Insurance companies Because
was reduced from 2.s9 per cent to 1875
per cent by this mears, many persons
have been led to believe that do
crease In taxation has been effected
by shifting the burden from farmers
anu suhIl nOnie oWhcrb W lnc DfOau
| to bear IT," VI tfs 40 4
These data show that there has
beon no actual nor relative decrease
! In taxation, but, on the contrary. there
has been an actual and relative in
crease IN taxation during the ten-year
period from l89G-190G. covering the
| time this policy OF special taxation
has been IN operation. as compared
| with the ten-year periOd from 1896 to
1898, whom none of THESE special taxes
was being collected.
| Special taxes for state purposes
wherever assessed have invariably re-
suited In an enormous growth In state
taxation. The result In Ohio is now
before you, Compare the growth of
state taxation In relation to local tax
alton and population. and Of local tax;
! answer the question. DO these re-
= suits show that the present taxation