Polk County observer. (Monmouth, Polk County, Or.) 1888-1927, 1910-08-02
DO NOT BACK DOWN
State Tax Commissioners Stand by
Their Mischieyous Ruling.

State Tax Commissioner Charles v.
Galloway and J. b. Eaton have pre-
pared statement setting forth their
views more fully on the question of
taxing mortgage notes and on the dis
cussion which followed a letter recent
ly sent out by the Commission to the
County Assessors of the state
This present statement will probably
be placed in the form of letter to the
Assessors 1t is in part as follows:
Fright now we want it to be plain
ly understood by the County. Assessors
and by others who may be Interested,
that the letter of July Is has not been
withdrawn or amended, either in word
or spirit; neither will 1t be- Attempt
1 has been made in certain quarters, Ell
ther through ignorance of the law or
through deliberate purpose of misun-
derstanding the law and the intention
Of this Board, to misrepresent the let
ter and pervert its meaning. But any
one who is even tolerably familiar with
matters of taxation knows that there
are vital differences between a tax on
mortgages and a tax on mortgage
notes.
TO summarize differences between
a mortgage tax and a mortgage note /
tax: The former is in effect tax on
real property, the latter is tax on a
certain class of personal property; the
former is applied at the situs of the
land, and the latter, at the domicile
of the owner, or of the person ac-
tually in possession; the former tax
of the state and against non-residents,
of the state and against non-reidents,
the latter can be assessed only against
residents. the note or other credit (
must be actually within the state,
either in the hands of it's owners or of
an agent, or otherwise localized for Z
as distinguished from tenn
porary, use. 8
1T can of course be readily seen
hat the general effects of mortgage :
ak and of mortgage note tax are de- v
;idedly different. Under a mortgage C
AK resident and nonresident creditors
ire on a decided different footing. The
of such a law is to frighten
outside capital and keep it away from r
he state. Under tax on mortgage :,
otes and other credits, the home :
reditor is at disadvantage as COM :"
ared with the nonresident creditor
Where fully understood, the tendency
+ such a law is to encourage invest
rents of outside capital in the state; o.
)r the nonresident creditor, holding
is notes. and securities at home, can
OF be taxed for them here.
I'VE contrast this situation with one tn
year ago when capitalists living pI
one of the Eastern Oregon counties in
.qHested that we direct the Assessor m
that county not to assess their notes
II the reason that this enforcement
the law placed them at a disad-
Lntage as compared with capitalists bill
ling in the State of Washington. Nat co
ally, and properly too, they don't ca
re the idea of being taxed on their
ties. whether their money is placed
home or abroad while Washington
pitalists compete with them for Ore
n loans and holding their notes in ne,
pay no tax in either
tie.
In view of every fact in the case,
comments about the Tax ,
trying to restore the mort ~
ge tax are silly. We are not trying ~
resurrect the repealed law and
Ildn't If we would but we are try
: to enforce existing laws laws as 7
al and binding as any on our stat Sol
books and laws, Furthermore, COM Nv
nded by our constitution to remain t,r
part of our scheme of taxation.
even IL the members of this Com
'sion wished to do so they could not, IT
hout dis-regarding their plain duty aro
their oaths of office. give any
er instruction to the Assessors than
they should list for taxation all
it is possible for them to list of II
neys and credits. including rotes n.
lred l.y mortgage and those not so r.
Ired. Furthermore. the Assessors
e no discretion to exempt this
perty."