Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1909-01-08

important changes proposed Is the
establishment OF county assessor
system % q substitute for the plan;
now In vogue, which consists OF town
ship and city assessors. The ohice
should be under the direction or SUI
pervtsion OF the tax commission, SO
that some general plan might be
worked out which would be uniform
throughout the state.
Taxation Of Corporations.
As set forth by. the tax commission
the taxation of corporations Is not
satisfactorily accomplished under the
present law, largely because the lists
now required of these organizations
do not harmonic with legal condi-
tions. The enactment of w pro
viding for q more extended list Of
queries is important and essential to
larger returns and q better enforce:
ment Of the law. ,
OF particular moment is that chap
ter of the commissions report In
which is discussed the question of the
gross earnings tar Of railways. The
state now receives over $3,0O0,0 900 an
nually in railway taxes and II the re-
cent decision of the court in the gross
earnings tax suit is sustained the
amount now received will be in
creased by about 100000, as by its,
provisions all of the roads must pay
per cent gross earnings tax. While
the amount now received is large it is
pointed out by the commission that
under an ad valorem basis, uniform
and equal with other property In the
state, the present rate of 4 per cent
does not meet the requirements nee
essary to equal taxation.
In the matter OF the assessment of
personal property the law establishes
an arbitrary personal property list.
Expansion from time to time has
made the list q complicated one and
because 1t has been arbitrary it has
resulted in at least the occasional
omission Of property which should, be
listed. In view of the changes which
possibly may be necessary the com
mission should be given the power to
extend or decrease the list OF items.
as exigency may necessitate.
Taxation ct iron Properties.
:. During the earlier years of the state
our natural resources were largely.
agricultural and forest. Recently,
however, we have grown to be the
first mining state of the Union and
our almost phenomenal sudden growth
in this field has made the question Of
the taxation OF. iron ore one of the ut
most impOrtanceH and of our gravest
concern. In the past tWenty-four
years the state has pursued two sys-
tens nor the taxation of iron. For
eleven years during the infancy of the
industry tonnage, tax OIL cent per
ton was imposed, one-haf of which
Remained in the state treasury, the
other half being returned to the co,t.l-
~ treasurer. The net amount re-,
ceived by the state during that period
was $4S,453.77. For thirteen years
iron taxation has been upon An ad
valoren basis and the amount re-
ce;ved by the state has grownz trom
$l1,572.33 in 1896 to 1861 200 in 1897
and $599,40o in 1908. It's not my
purpose at this time to discuss the
merits of either the ad valorem or ton
mage systems. While it is most inn
portant matter believe that it is not
question Of systems so much as that
the mining properties should pay their
full and just share of the taxes. In
the consideration of this question one
point must never be lost sight of: The
counties, cities, towns and school dis
tricts in the mining districts must
never be deprived of their full share
of the tax levied and any plan which
would deprive them in any measure
Of their just share OF reliable and con-
.tinUouS revenues could not be enter
tanned, as it would be unfair, unjust,
unwise and unworthy of the state.
Awaiting Courts Decision.
l have refrained from a discussion
Of the two systems Of taxation for the
present because of the uncertain state
in which we find ourselves and may
avail myself of future opportunity for
q further discussion of this question
IN special message. Previously, un-
Ger our constitution as it stood for
nearly quarter Of century, ton
mage tax could not be imposed. The
legislature, by an ACT approved. April
Is, 1905, proposed to the people of
the state for their approval or rejec-
ton an amendment to article 8 of the
constitution, which was known as the
wide open tax amendment, and which,
if approved by the people, would have
given to the legislature wider latitude
than it then enjoyed. The state can
vassing board declared said amend
ment adopted and proclamation by
the governor was accordingly made.
A partial recount of the vote was had
and in the district court Judgment
was entered declaring the amendment