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

important changes proposed is the
establishment OF county assessor
system as substitute for the plan
now in vogue, which consists of town
ship and city assessors. The Office
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 a more extended list of
queries is important and essential to
larger returns and better enforce;
ment of the law. .,a .
OF particular moment is that chap
ter of the commissions report in
which is discussed the question of the
gross earnings tax of railways. The
state now receives over $4,000, 900 an
nually in railway taxes and if 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 it's,
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 al 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 a complicated one and
because it 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 OF Iron Properties.
f. During the earlier years of the state
our natural resources we're largely
agricultural and forest. Recently,
however we have grown to be the
first mining state of the Union and
in this field has made the question of
the taxation of. iron ore one of the ut
most Importance and of our gravest
concern. In the past tWenty-four
years the state has pursued two sys-
tens for the taxation of iron. For
eleven years during the infancy of the
industry tonnage tax OIL cent per
ton was imposed, one-half of which
ic1nained in the state treasury, the
other hail being returned to the co,s:l-
~ treasurer The net amount re-
ceived by the state during that period
was $4S.453.77. For thirteen years
non taxation has been upon an I'D
ceivea by the state has grown from
$11,572.33 in 1895 to $685., 200 in 1907
and $599,4 in 1908. It's not my
purpose at this time to discuss the
merits Of either the ad yalorem or tom
mage systems. While it is a most inn
portant matter I believe that it is not
a question Of systems so much as that
"a .ra{n i1e- e1 ~
full and just share Of the taxes. In
the Consideration of this question one
point nltist 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-
.tinU0ns revenues could not be enter
tanned, as It would be unfair, unjust,
unwise and unworthy of the state.
Awaiting Courts Decision.
have refrained from a discussion
OF the two systems OF taxation for the
present because of the uncertain state
AZ! " lIit1i We ilIN selves ana Inlay
avail myself of future opportunity for
a further discussion Of this question
III special message. Previously, u1l-
Ger our constitution as it stood for
nearly a quarter OF a century, a 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 reiec-
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 a 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
| lost. Appeal was taken to the supreme
court, where the matter is still pend.
ing, but from which decision will be
handed down during this legislative
session and in season for Such action