The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1912-08-17
evasion of taxes on intangibles would
The Third Remedy.

evasion OF taxes ON intangibles woulo
remain.
The Third Remedy,
"The third remedy is to place a uni
form or fiat rate, as we do with savings
bank deposits, on all intangibles, such
as cash, notes, mortgages, bonds and
credits. For this remedy, we have as a
guide the experience of sister states. We
would not be treading an UNEMPLOYED
path of experiment. About 80 years
ago Pennsylvania adopted the method
of taxing intangibles at the rate of four
mills on the fair cash value. In 1885
her taxes on intangibles amounted to
only Sl45, 100000. In 1907. % wears
later, they had risen to $l.0l4,000, which
was more than "A siX-fold increase. Dur
ing substantially the same period Ohio
followed a system of taxing intangibles
like ours. And with what result? In
1881 she had Sl50,300000 of taxed in
tangibles: in 1905, 20 years later, she
had only Sl47, 100000, an actual decrease
of S2,400,00O.
I'm 1886 Maryland passed law tax
1 ing intangibles at the low rate of 4.6
mills. In 1886 the assessed value of in
tangbles in the city of Baltimore was
S6,000,000; in 1907, IL years later, they
had risen to $l50,900000. Think of i'll
Maryland with a population of 0S,96T
census of l900) has 100000 more Sc.
cnrities in her tax list than the great
state Of Ohio with population of 4,l57,-
515. With a more drastic and more in
quisitorial system of taxation than ours.
Ohio could not find as many intangibIes
among 100000 as Baltimore with a low
fat rate could among one fourth as many
people. Under the Ohio law an informer
or spy was given commission for dis
covering property illegally omitted from
the list.
"The Massachusetts, commission which
visited Ohio reported that to all in
quiries about the taxation of personal
property in Ohio the uniform reply was:
| We are state of liars and perurers.
Our law eompels us to make return or
our personal property and to pay a tax
ranging from two to four per cent upon
the full cash value. No man can or will
pay such an exorbitant tax. and the re-
suit is that practically every man de-
tends himself from spoilation and confs-
cation by perjuring his soul. You can
not overstate the situation. No words
can do Justice to the iniquities of our
present system. The estates of widows
and orphans pay one-half of their in
come. A few conscientious citizens
may pay the greater proportion of
theirs; but the general result is that the
owner of money credits and securities
either leaves the state or makes false
return to the assessor. Our present sys-
TEN is school OF dishonesty and per-
jury
I'VE may not like to admit it, but
who is bold enough to deny, that the
experience of Ohio has been repeated in
Vermont. In the % years from 1887 to
1910, our listed personal property dim n
ished nearly S5,000,000, while listed real
estate increased nearly S34 100000. Is
there anyone so simple as to believe
that these tax figures tell the truth /
If we have grown poor in personal prop |
erty, we have done likewise in real es-
tate. The increase or elimination in
the one should correspond with that OF
the other. Such was the case in the q /
years from 1866 to 1887, but since 1885
our average rate of taxation has risen
from Sl.25 TO near the $500 mark. As |
your local ratet has risen TO meet the
requirements OF modern needs. your in
tangibles have disappeared from your
tax list. The natural honesty and patri-
otism of our people has not been strong
enough to resist the temptation TO put
their assets beyond the reach of the tax
collector. The taxpayer justifes his
course because the law has Disseminated
against his intangibles.
One of Our Inequalities.
According to the commissions report
OF 1908, the real estate was then APP
praised at about 20 per eenlt. of its &C
tual value throughout the state, but in
tangibles were appraised at their face
value. Ii man had $1,000 in cash or
notes and credits due from solvent
debtor, his list would be sl0 and he
would have to pay tax of SIS at the
average rate Of $3.50 The same thou.
sand dollars invested in real estate would
hc listed at only seven dollars, and he
would pay only $3.50. To equalize the
burden the intangibles should have been
set in the list at 20 per cent. of their
value, or else the rate should have been /
'educed to 1925 on a dollar. otherwise :
he 81 600 in the one ease pays at the
'ate OF S2.57 as compared with the rate i
4 Sl.S0 in the other. for it requires [
ate of 1921 to raise as much on a 81 II
yrand list as rate of $3.50 raises on al Il
10 grand list. If the 81 900 in each case i
armed six per cent. yearly, the real es- b
ate investment would net $500, while
he loan would net only $500 differ t
nee of $40 in favor of the real es- a
ate 4
"A rate of $500 would eonfiscate 80 i
3 per cent. OF the income on intangi- ;
lies and no taxpayer will submit to such Q
onfscation except in the few cases in Q
which he is compelled to do so. If a /,
armer were obliged to pay 80 l-3 per |,
ent. of the income of his farm in taxes, 4
'ou would have a revolution. Think d
vhat would happen if every farmer had &
o deliver to the town treasurer every b
bird pound of butter, every third ton o
t hay, and every third bushel of grain b
'et to-day you are taking nearly every il
Eird dollar of income on intangibles and
n many towns every other dollar, pro- +,
ided your listers are able to catch the Il
n
"But your listers find it more difficult y
o catch intangibles than to capture a n
ull moose. You cannot lure them into @,
he tax list by call through a birch y
ark horn. They retire into the intricate b.
nd hidden recesses of the business world. a
lore difficult to pierce than tropical d
mgle. You may denounee this as dis Sc