The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1912-11-08

general assembly to consider the merits
! of d uniform low rate of taxation on
money, loans and mortgages as means
of increasing public revenues, state or
/ local, by offering easier terms To the
/ borrower, and by stimulating home in
dustry" While the above resolution is
! somewhat clumsily worded, since the ex.
preston, such lowered rate" has no
antecedent, ii is perfectly evident that
the meaning of the platform is to put
corporations and individuals on an equal
ity, The nominee Of the Republican
party in accepting the nomination, stat
ed that he would favor the adoption Of
a law that would put individuals and
corporations ON an equality. That the
Senate bill 81 does not equalize the taxa
tion between corporations and indiyid-
uals is too apparent TO need much COM
ment.
In the first place, the bill exempts
loans secured on real estate situated in
the state of Vermont. If an individual
holds a mortgage secured by loan in
another stae, he must pay the local
rate, which will average about $50;
while the banks, which in 1911 had over
33,000,000 on loans on real estate out
side Of Vermont, would have to pay only
seven mills. In other words, the indi
yduals would pay two and one half times
as much as bank. Is this equality1
Again, the banks have invested in
loans on personal security, on deposit
book collateral, on bank stock collateral,
on mortgage collateral. on other collat-
eral and in railroad, municipal and Unit
ed States bonds, the sum of Sll ,627,-
1928. On this large sum of money the
banks pay but seven mills, while the i'm
diyidual making loans on, or investing
in, any of these securities would have to
pay the local rate, which averages about
81 so. Here is an inequality which the
Republican party pledged itself to elm
mate.
There seems to be neither rhyme nor
reason for the discrimination that would
exist il the Senate bill became a law.
II would not uncover the vast amount
Of hidden securities on outside invest
ments that now escape taxation. 1t
would be a shifting Of burdens, without |
benefits. 1t would add an
other to the list of broken promises |
which have fettered the Republican party |
N the past. 1t would not benefit at all |
he towns where the tax rate is now be- !
ow 81 50. for in such towns money can |
low be loaned proitably by an individ
ial. On the other hand, it would, in
act, harm all towns, whatever their rate
II taxation. by depicting their local |
and revenues. That real es
ate mortgages should bear some of the
BURDENS of government is Just and fair.
We complain of our court expenses, but
large item of the court expenses re-
ults from the foreclosure of real estate
Mortgages. There is almost no burden to
lie state for chattel mortgages, because
hese are foreclosed without suit.
After some years OF study ON this
uestion, | have come to the conclusion,
nd believe many Others have, that the
rue remedy is a uniform rate on all in
angibles. Space would not permit me
0 set forth the advantages of a uni
Drm or fiat rate system. If there are
nv who think my presentation of this
inject worth reading, they can find it
the Burlington Free Press or in the
t. Adams Messenger Of Aug. 10, 1912
If we are not to adopt the flat rate.
believe that the registration system of
ew York would be the second choice.
II ntangibes, notes, bonds, or mort
iges, in that state, are uniformly as
,ssed at rate Of five mills when they
C registered and are exempt from all :
her taxes. In other words, New York
fleets five dollars on every thousand
liars OF intangibles. As the average
'riod Of real estate mortgages in Yer
ont is little over five years. we would <
t one years tax under this system, but 4
would be something, while the SEN
e proposition to get nothing and to
ave all the inequalities and discrimina-
lns that now exist under the law to
borne by other classes of property.
John W. Gordon. ID