Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1907-02-26
TERMINAL TAXATION.

Fremont Tribunel The railroad argument
against terminal taxation, that Il will take
away tax receipts from the country dis
tricta and towns and give II TO the larger
cities where there II terminal property,
looks good on It's face, but N II were really
true the railroads wouldn't care. What
does II matter 20 them where they pay
their taxes provided the taxes remain the
same as hcretofore2 Terminal taxation
means they win pny a greater tax, because
they viii then pay for the advantages they
enjoy IN the cities whore their valuable
terminals are This II the nub Of the thing.
Schuyler Free Lance There ds no reason
why the railroad companies should not pay
city taxes on their property located within
corporate limits. just tho same as any other
property owner does. All property owners
pay their state and county taxes Just the
same as an owner living outside the city
does, and then pay the additional city taxes
as we'll The railroad companies should do
the same. and have the assessment Just
the same az to valuation aa u they did not
pay the city tax. The bill before the legis-
lature now to permit OF cities like Omaha
taxing terminals shoold pass and It should
also permit of all cities and villages getting
the benefit of that tax on all railroad prop
erty located within any corporate limits.
And the idea that because they pay city
| taxes should lower their state and county
taxes Is buncomb Does it lower any man s
state and county taxes any because he
pay city taxes? Well we guess not, and
neither should Il lower that of railroads. A
man in the county assessed at $4,000 valua-
ton is assessed on that for state and
county taxes at the regular levy and the
man in the city with an assessed valuation
of $1,000 pays the same as does his country
brother, and in addition pays his city tax
but because he pays the latter his state
and county tax is not lowered and neither
should II be.
Blair Courier: What taxpayer would not
like to move his city property out into one
of the townships in the country that has
the lowest tax rate just long enough to
have it assessed, and then move it back
again where it has increased value and
the advantages of mail city water for fire
protection, police or surveillance, etc? That
is just what the railroads have been doing
with their tracks and depots for years. and
now they are kicking like bay steers when
they are asked to pay city taxes for what
property they have in the city. Just as
other people must do. That is what is
meant by terminal taxation" you have
been hearing much about. Is there any
thing unfair about 1t? Railroad papers try
to make people believe it means taking
taxes away from the townships through
which the roads run, simply because the
roads are asked to pay more taxes in the
cities Even Representative Schoettger
seems to have been thrown off the track
by this argument, to our great surprise.
There can be little doubt but that he sees
ere this that the railroads would not op-
pose the measure If it, simply meant chang
ing the method of paying the same amount
of taxes. They fight It because it means
paying in more taxes, paying just as much
taxes on the dollar in the cities as other
property owners pay. This is not hard to
understand and it is more than likely that
the fellows who can't see it don't want to,
being tarred with the railroad stick