New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1912-08-07
TAXATION IN NrNNtsoFA
rwENTYlHo1H AxE1Qnv
1xsmption From Taxation

\ purposes shall be exempt from taxa
ton. Exempt property may be divid-
ed into four general classes, ~ edu-
cstional. (2) religious. 60 charitable.
and ~ public.
In addition to the above, there may
be exempted from taxation personal
property not exceeding in value 5000
for each household. individual or head
Of . family, rs the legislature may
determine. @
Property used for educational purt-
poses includes public libraries. public
school houses, academies. colleges.
universities, ana all seminaries Of
learning. Property leased to an edu-
cational institution, however. or pro-
perty owned by such an institution
but not devoted to or necessary for
its use is not exempt from taxation.
Church property includes all church
90 and houses of worship and the
land necessary for the proper use and
enjoyment OF the same. Mere owner
shin by a church, however, does not
necessarily exempt the property from
taxation. Under the decisions of the
courts parsonage or q rectory be.
longing to a church, even though used
in part for religious services, Is not
exempt from taxation; nor Is land or
other property owned by church but
not used for church purposes exempt
property.
Property used for charitable pur-
poses includes public hospitals, and
all institutions of purely public chart
ty, such as almshouses, homes for
orphans, the aged or dependents, and
ali other property devoted exclusively
to public charity.
Public property includes all proper
ty of the federal and state govern
ments, and the property of each NUM-
cfpality Of the state used for puDhc
purposes. Property owned by NUM-
cipality but not used or necessary Tor
public purposes is not exempt from
taxation.
In q general way it may be said that
1t Is the use, not the ownership, that
determines the question of exemp-
ton. Constitutional provisions gov
erning exemptions, and statutory laws
based on the constitution, are strict
" construed by the courts. Such
exemptions are regarded as an abro-
cation OF part Of the sovereignty Of
the state, and they are consequently
confined to the strict letter OF the
constitution, and can neither be en-
1areed or extended by legislative en-
actment.
Notwithstanding these restrictions
the legislature has from time to time
enacted laws exempting from taxation
other classes of property not embraced
in the constitutional provision. 1t has,
for instance, attempted to exempt the
property of Incorporated district and
county agricultural societies, and the
buildings and other property owned
and used exclusively by beneficiary
associations and fraternal beneficiary
associations, as well as an additional
personal property exemption OF $lOO
for each member of the national
guard.
These laws are clearly unconstitu-
tional and fail to accomplish the pur-
pose for which they were enacted. AS
already stated, the legislature has no
authority, either directly or Indirect
ly. to exempt property or persons from
taxation except as authorized by the
constitution, and as these exemptions
are not authorized by the constitu-
ton, it is held by the legal depart
ment of the state that a legislative
enactment attempting to do so is null
and void.
The constitutional provision relating
to personal property exemption leaves
it optional with the legislature to de-
eide whether there shall or shall not
be any such exemption, and If any,
the amount thereof not exceeding
5000. The legislature may also deter
mine whether the exemption shall ap-
ply to each household, individual or
head of a family. The present ex-
emption of 800 applies to each indi-
vidual subject to a personal property
assessment.
There Is considerable abuse of the
personal property exemption In some
districts of the state. Not few
people attempt to list their personal
property In the name of several mem
bers of the family. In some cases
called to the attention of the tax com.
mission personal property was divided
among as many as sir members OF q
family when the actual and bona fide
owner was the head of the family.
This practice is a serious violation
of law and Is punishable by fine or
imprisonment. Section 1898, Revised
Laws OF 1905, provides that every
person who, in making any statement,
oral or written, which is required or
authorized by law to be made as
basis of imposing or reducing any tax
or assessment, who shall wilfully
make any statement as to any mater
ial matter which he knows to be
false, shall be guilty of a gross mis-
demeanOr.
= l5zkKEJ{14