The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1912-01-11
INCOME TAX LAW CONSTITU-
TlOMAL, SAYS COURT.

1 ne WlScOuSln incOiHo IdA Ia" Paoo
ed by the legislature of 1911 was Tues
day held constitutional by the Wiscon-
sin supreme court.
Contrary to expectation the decision
of the court is unanimous in favor OF
the law.
The great questions in the case as to
whether the measure did not violate
the federal constitution in making
men unequal before the law by giving
exemptions and providing for pro-
gressive rate of taxation proportionate
to incomes, and as to whether the
state constitution was not violated in
different rate OF taxation for persons
and corporations are passed upon and
the clauses of the law making these
provisions are held not to contravene
the constitution.
| Much future litigation will, however,
arise out of the law as the court leaves
numerous important questions undecid-
ed which die not necessarily have to he
passed on in deciding the constitution
ality of the law as unit Among the
questions left undecided are the right
to tax the business of interstate cor
porations doing business in this state
and the right to tax non-resdents on
the income from property in this
state.
Chief Justice Winslow writes the
|opinion in the case for the court and
there is a concurring opinion by JUS
tice Marshall. In his concurring opin-
ion Justice MARSHALL says he believes
all the questions in the case should
have been decided at this time.
Attorneys interested in the legal
fight against the income tax law said
there would undoubtedly be an appeal
from the decision of the Wisconsin
court on the law to the United States
supreme court.
After sustaining the jurisdiction OF
the supreme court, the general object
of the law is reviewed, the court say
| ing:
sThis change was ratified by the
people at the general election held in
| November, 1908, and thus was clearly
expressed by both the legislature and
people, the idea that some form OF
general taxation in addition TO or in
place of property taxation might we'll
be adopted The attempt has now
been made to carry out this idea and
we have the result before us in the
! ! ?resent law.
| with the political or economic pol
icy or expediency of the law. we have
nothing to do, if it be within consti-
sutional license and embodying public
policy, because it is enacted by that
branch of the government which de-
termines public policy.
| The court went on to state that in
come taxation IS no longer new and
untried experiment in the history of
| taxation.
"By this act, the legislature has in
substance, declared that the states
system of taxation has been changed
from a system of uniform taxation of
property so far as personal
property is concerned, has proven a
failure-to system which shall be a
combination of two ideas, namely:
Taxation of personal property, pro-
gressively according to the ability TO
pay, and taxation of the real property
uniformly, according to value"
| In answer to the claim that the act
violates the provisions of the state con-
stituton, guaranteeing local self-gov-
ernment, the court says:
'It is sufficient to say that we do not
regard the office of assessor of incomes
as either county, town or village
office, nor do we regard it as an Office
existing in substance at the time of the
adoption of the constitution or essen
| tial to the existence or efficiency of any
of the municipal cities of the state, but
rather an entirely new office within
the fourth class above named, whose
election or appointment may be pro-
vided for in any way that the legisla-
ture may in it's discretion direct"
With regard to the exemption feat
ure of the act, the opinion says in
part:
SIS there such substantial difference
between the classes as to reasonably
suggest or call for the propriety of
different treatment? We are clearly
of the opinion this question must he
answered in the Affirmative"
The section providing for the taxa.
| tion of the incomes of non-residents de-
| rived from source within the state
and for the taxation of certain pro-
portion of the Income arising from in
| ter state business, are not passed upon.
| A number Of other questions are not
considered necessary to be now decided
and are left for future consideration.
Among those questions are whether
any difference can be legally made be-
tween the exemptions allowed to resi-
idents and non-residents and also
whether foreign bondholders in do
mestic corporations can he taxed and
the tax collected from the corporation
and deducted from the next interest
| payment on the bond