Daily Kennebec journal., 1908-12-19
TAX COMMISSION REPORT.
Continued from Page One.)


according to the report of the board o
state assessors. about 12O per cent
These figures and facts would seem t.
that land in Tnincorporated places car
and ought to stand larger tax and thu
relieve relieve the the property owners in cities ant
more on their property.
The State In 1905 adopted the wise polio,
OF attempting to determine the true valu
of wild land townships. An approLiia
tion was made and authority given to tn
board of State assessors to employ expert
enced woodsmen to cruise and sul've.
townships. We have examined some o
the reports made by such surveyors. The.
give in detail all the information and dat
necessary to determine the true value o
such townships.
the question. trying to find some methot
that would solve this difficult and vita
problem Of the taxation Of property j
unincorporated townships. Owners of viii
lands have Maid constant court to til
Legislature. and their skilled attorney
have raised constitutional objections
nearly every method proposed The
raise not only legal distinctions but hav
pleaded that TO increase their tax woul
be to denudt. our forests
We have been urged to recommend
so-called 'stumpage tax" The friends
this tax advocate the practical exemp
ton Of wild lands; as such. from taxa
the annual cut. 1t is urged that so Ion
as the owner receives no income fror
cutting his timber he should not pay tax
es. as he is p public henefactor in tha
he is allowing the trees to grow. the NOR
to protect cur watersheds.
The manufacturers of lumber. as a rule
object to tie "stumpage tax" The lant
owner generally sells or permits" tn
right to crt. charging therefor an agree
SUN for each thousand feet. board meas
ure. Mill owners. or manufacturers. mus
take ali the hazard incident To tteir pre-
caiious business, and they urge that 1
wild lands were exempt from taxation
more difficult than now to obtain per
NIT or license to cut. They further urg'
that the land owner would take the posi-
tion that his logs Or stnmpase wer' T
State levies stumrage tax Of 30 cent.
per thousand-and that the licens.e o,
mill owner must pay that tax In additio,
TO the price of the regular stumpage.,
Furthermore. We have doubts as to tn
constitutioEality of such & law. u nigh
possibly be worked out bY eXtenainG IN
regulate tie size of the logs TO be cut
80 rs to hold that the state has the rish'
to prohibit all cutting without INST oo
tanning license therefor, If this Is 50
the State might possibly charge licens
of a fyed amount per, thousand cur
Could this he done. and tbs State collect
the annual cut Ia be from 5oGoO,W0 t.
6OA, ,O0N 600 feet as we estimate from sucf
investigation as we have been able
make nma Of It setwsen W""n I and an "n TIKI TF
is in CONTRAST to SIP 7Sl IS. the amount O
State tax paid On wild lands for the yea
1877.
We have been urred ty othors to rec
ommend that the State assume more o
the municinal functions such rs puhli'
schools, roads and bridges-thereby neces
stating large State tax rat" of pos
sihlv 10 mills on the dollar This wou!
certainly increase the Amount to be pal
places. brt at the same time it woul'
increase the Stat" tax on ON cities an
towns sevcn mills The grave Guestio'
to be 'otorn,ined would he whether tn
cities ,,rh towns would receive INST and
equitable benefits to compensate them TO
tn" extra tax of e"Nen pills. The dls.
position Of this additional sl'"' collerte
nv TIC state. so that tho nnbic burden
would be home rore 'iustlv and cGuit
ahlv' would be most complex and diff
ficult problem.
If it is true that TIE assessors toda
ar" adoptin" the policy of 'ndaryaluin
pronerty for tho purpose of relleVin
their r,sreGtve towns of Their their Inst tdanr an.
when tho tax is only three mills. wha'
may we expect should the State tax rat
he raised to 1G mills? The present In
For the above stated reasons we do mo-
recommend the adontion Of either Of t.
above mentioned systems as relief t"
the Overburdened taxpayer in the cite
and towns.
Apporti onment Of the Direct State Ia
We hold that the State should appor-
tion the State tax upon cities. towns,
plantat ation. and unincorporated township
In the proportion that their RESPECTIVE
land values bear to the total land value
ritory contains no class of property othe
than land This is the only class of prop.
erty found in all our geographical and
political subdivisions. and we believe i;
a sound principle of Just and equitable"
taxation that a taxing power should base
its revenue on a class of property whicl
H., a.
domain. or If 1t is to derive it's revenue
from indirect taxation. as is the case wit
oalr Federal Government. it should levy
its duty on class of property that is
used in all sections of the countrv-other-
wise the revenue of the Government
would be contributed by the property
or people In a comparatively small sec
ton of the Commonwealth.
The present direct State tax amounts
to s.ls!, 27442 being three mills on our
total valuation. OF this amount, the
wild lands $ll2, 7el.5s.
If the present direct State tax had been |
apportioned on land values the cities and
towns would have paid 1903. .7s5. 50. this be
ing SIG. 7.@ less than now paid. and the
wild lands would have paid s2Sl $50, this |
being $lS9.117;42 more than now paid.
tables will show that every county in the
State derives a material benefit. save two
--Aroostools and Oxford. The muncpali |
have paid s14,9a2.64 less State tax; Cum |
berland. $49.4as33: Franklin, s4.6s3.45: |
Hancock sS6695O Kennobec. 2.l3S.55:
Knox $1l ,739. 90: Lincoln. $685. 43: Penob-
dahoc. 81 4s2 80. Somerset. $l2.7ss;ss; Wal,
do. $6.49S.72: Washington. $46S9 %; and
York, s9.032
1t will be noted that we yet have
said nothing about taxing land value. |
We have discussed only the anportior- |
ment of the State tax. Our idea is that |
we shall use the land values of cities. |
towns and townships solely for fixing |
the amount of the State burden that each |
city. town and township shall paw as
State taxes After this is determined by |
the Legislature. upon the report of the
State assessors. then 1t simply passes a
bill assessing the amount of tax that each |
should nay. We do not dstrub the pres |
ent method of the State treasurer in is |
suing his warrant to municipal assessors.
The warrant having been issued. then tn a |
amount apportioned to the city or town |
IS to be assessed and raised inst as 1t |
is TODAY. on all classes of taxable proper |
ty within the municipality. The system |
suggested does not irvolve a change OF
anv law relating to tho assessment and |
collection Of taxes in the several cities |
and towns.
The owners of wild lands may plead |
that the tax imposed bv the adoption |
of this method is excessive, and that |
as result our forests would he de- |
pudcd-stripped Of timber for the rur- |
pose Of making them less valuable. Is It |