The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-11-16
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER lc, 1907.
The smallest seed OF faith is bet
ter than the largest fruit of lnppt-
ness.--IIcnry ID. Thorcnu.
cosr OF COLLECTING TAXES.

What does it cost to collect the puo-
lie revenues in Virginia? 1t is a. pretty
problem Accurate figures can be given,
; so far as the state is concerned, but
: precisely what 1t costs the individual
counties is another matter. For the
last fiscal year the county and city
treasurers paid into the treasury of
) the State the sum Of s2.976.SS2lS, for
which they received in commissions
a total OF sl27,149.0S. or 40 per
cent The clerks collected sa673ie.4S,
for which they received per cent. in
commissions, and the Auditor collect
ed from the railroads. banks. etc,
si,219,C56.7s, on which no commissions
were paid, making a total of $780,
sS1.34. the whole cost of collection be-
ing something more than per cent.
For local purposes. the counties col
lected s2,G03. 032.53, and the cities So
915,46S.67. This is exclusive Of the
counties of Allegheny. Dinwiddie, Han
over, Lancaster, Northampton Patrick.
Washington, Warwick and York,
from which we have no report. With
these exceptions, the counties of Vir-
ginia paid their trcasurers the lump
sum of S1o4. 1o2.07. but whether that
includes all cost of collecting local
taxes we know not. The cities paid to
their collectors the lump sum of SOL
774.77
1t would appear from these exhibits
during the year named total tax of
I, s1s,9S1sS0.54. and that the cost OF
collection was s296S93.04. or something,
more than per cent.
This compares very favorably with
Louisiana, where 1t is costing sS25.-
900 to collect s70Oo,O00 In taxes. but
unfavorably with Indiana. which col
lects for all purposes-Statc, county
and city--s3l 100000 at a total cost of
s2s24Oo, being less than per cent.
But the favorable exhibit which Vir-
ginia makes Ia due to two facts. One is
that large portion of her revenue is
paid into the AUDITORS Office without
cost, and the other that the percentage
of collection costs in the cities Is very
small 1t costs the counties s104,102.07
to collect So, 6Os032.53. or nearly 5 per
cent, whereas it costs the cities $751;
77477 to collect s6,915,4ss67, or less
than per-.cent..
s. What the basis OF remuneration in
-.the counties is we do not know. The
State pays a graduated commission.
as already stated, which averages AZ
: per cent. but there Is no sort of uni
formity in the counties. For example.
the county of Accomac pays its treas
urer $4,000 for collecting taxes amount
ing to $5l,1S3, whereas Augusta. which
collects s1o4as4. pays its treasurer
: sl,54S. Botetourt, which collects but
s3S.0S2. pays its treasurer S1,442, whiia
Brunswick pays sl,966 for collecting
s29,37.. Norfolk county collects s12S,-
1868, and pays her treasurer $255S.5l;
Henrico collects s95,s73.57, and pays
her treasurer s4,26S10. In addition, the
treasurer of Henrico receives S2,5oD
from the State, which makes the total
emoluments of that office s676S. Chess
terfield pays her treasurer sl,0SS for
Z collecting s5s.S7O: Cumberland sl,17s.S1
tor collecting sls,6S5.9S, and Giles pays
only $500 for collecting $4,000 There
are many other glaring contrasts OF
the same character. which should cause
the taxpayers, in some of the counties
at least. to take notice. The fees are
either too low in some or too high in
others.
But why should Virginia still cling
to the fee system? 1t is Anticipated and
demoralizing, and many States are
discarding 1t. 1t has been discarded
already in the States OF Ohio South
Carolina Arizona. Colorado, Idaho.
Montana, New Hampshire. Michigan,
Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas and Others,
while Virginia clings to the commits
5ssion plan.
s4 We hope that the entire fee system
will be investigated and reformed by
the next Legislature.