Putnam patriot., 1909-11-05
New Tax Law.

About thirty assessors from neigh boring towns and Windham met Tn town hall Wiilimantic and were ad- dressed by Tax Commissioner w. Il. Commissioner with reference to the law relative to the taxation of property as passed by the last Legislature.
 He stated that the purpose Of the meeting was to bring about more ge- neral understanding of the laws reiat- ing to taxation and to get as far as pos sible general uniform method of as- sesslng property In the different towns throughout the State. He told of the many methods and plans adopted for the taxation of property in other States and compared them with Connecticut. It is not so much the rates in the State that cause dissatisfaction, but the inc quality. The assessors duty was to eoualize the valuation. The revalua- tion of property should be done only after the people have had full and ear conception of the entire matter
 A good many towns have made re valuation, and the valuation has gone up and the rate down. Equality should be the main aim of all assessors.
 He had no sympathy with the econ omics of towns in the payment of as- sessors. Many towns pay but $l.oo, xi. .a5, St. 50. No town should pay less than &. If they did, he intimsted, they would sponge on the taxpayers in some way.
 No owner, he said, could be forced to make any valuation on his property unless 1t Is the amount of hts money. Filing of lists with town clerks should be discouraged They should be filed with the assessors.
 With relation to re assessing of pro perty, the Commissioner read the fol- lowing judicial comment bytJadge Le- ser, of Baltimore, as being something pertinent and having particular bear ing on the subject in hand:
 "The practice of assessing below the standard originally grew no doubt out of desire to avoid trouble and argu- ment between assessor and property owner. Later, when the direct Stale tax levy came into vogue, under assess ments were resorted 10 in order to es- cape an equal barden of the stale tax. The practice Is sometimes defended on the plea that the actual value Is not exactly ascertained, therefore the As sessment Is marked down 10 a lower basis. How absurd to suppose that the assessor can correctly estimate two thirds but not threc-thtrds. The fact is he must always go through the men, tai process of estimating the iull value. The lanentable truth Is that the GUS lomary under-assessment Is used sim ply as a cloak for inetficiency and la Norilism. When the legal standard Is hahitually disregarsied. the stubstitu- ted standard can be anything that the as seSsors oh ,se to make il. The fiction wii be stidiously encouraged that a ratio of two thirds or thfee-tourths is the rule, but 1t becomes increasingly difficult 10 cheek-up inequalities, and stili more difficult to secure relief W hen the fact Is established. The assessor can point to the law requiring full val uation and challenge the oolector 10 lroSe that the law has been violated in hts case. All property owners may ee under assessed, though in greatly VA rying degree; but each Is Jailed into si- lence by the helief that he has secured an advantage over his fellows.
 atnll valuation furnishes a ready means fer exposing the weak spots, something W hieh the conscientious as- ~e>Sor> welcome as niuch as the gene rat taxpayer. IL simplilies and raises the appfaisemt of property for taxa- tiun lo the dignity of q science. Asses sors are required to be expert in Judg- ine values rather than in guessing al them. The assessment function Is raised 10 greater dlgnlty as the impor- tance of a business ike administration Is hroaght home directly to the tax payers. Full valuation ot really is fs> spons. ele for another neform-the sepa- rate valuation I land and improve