The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-01-13

in the state to avoid the assessor.
Experience has woefully taught us
the result Of a general run on a bank.
Without deposits, a bank might as
well close its doors; yes. If deposits
are suddenly withdrawn the examiner
will close it's doors. While the laws
Of the state would be thus enforced,
the laws Of economics at
the same time would be egregi-
ously violated, for there are
certain economic laws which are SUI
perior to statutes and constitutions.
The banks Of the state could not sur
Vive If the laws were enforced which
require money to be taxed It a uni
form rule at it's true value in money,
for the word uniform means that all
property Of every nature should pay
taxes at the same rate. By follow
Ing the foolish and uneconomical pro- |
visions Of our constitution, not only
money into the state, but citizens
would send their money out of the
state where it would not be subject
to such a burden, for money flows in
the direction Of the least resistance.
Would, not, them, h enforcement Of
such a law be positively harmful and
vicious? How, then, may we seek re-
lief from such a ~predicament?
The legislature in 1911 passed a con
current resolution providing that the
constitution be amended to read as
follows: Takes shall be uniform
upon the same class of property" This
was likewise passed by the legislature
at ita 1913 session. andwill be submitted
to popular vote for approval at the
general election next November. This
law, if passed, will greatly relieve our
general property tax system of its
h~arshness and unjustness. Many
states already have constitutions
which will permit Of classification of
property for purposes of taxation, as
above provided. With. such a change
in our constitution, the legislature
would be given authority to divide
property into classes and the tax
would be uniform upon the same class
Of property. This plan is no expert
ment. 1t has been tested In other
states with decidedly beneficial re-
suits. In Maryland. prior to. 1896,
taxes were levied at a uniform rate
on all property. This included in
tangible personal property, and, as in
North Dakota, it's results were farCical.
For that year in the city Of Baltimore
the assessed value Of securities was
S6,OO0,0 900 and the rate Of tax was 81
on 500. Then the law was changed
similar to the one we are e~ndeavoring
to adopt, permitting the legislature to
classify property for the purposes of
taxation. Under the changed law a
tax Of 80 cents on 800 was levied on
this same kind Of property. In one
year such values were increased from
Sc, 900, 900 to $55, 600, 900. and In ten
years to over $3.50, 600, 900. This enor- |
NOUS increase was brought about sole
ly on account Of the reduction in the
rate. The revenue from this class of
property has increased from $3.50, 900
under the higher rate to $3.50, 900 under
the lower rate. Using the figures of
the first year as a basis when such
property increased from S. 900, 900 to
$56,000,O0 we find that in 1896, the
old law produced more perjury than
evenue.
Since 1873, Pennsylvania's constitu-
ton has permitted the legislature to
classify property. for the purposes of
taxation. Intangible property was
placed In a separate. class and assess |
ed at the rate of 40 cents, on 500, a
much lower rate than other classes |
OF property we're taxed. The. result has
been that in the past twenty-five years
such property las been voluntarily
listed to a remarkable degree. In fact,
its growth has exceeded that of real
estate, for from 1886 to 1903, real es-
tate values Increased owe $2SS,000, 000.
or III per. cent while intangibles in
creased in the same period from $685.
O0O, 600 to $4,000 1000, or 583 per cent.
M1nnesota's constitution was re-
Gently changed to provide for classi- |
tcation OF property for purposes of
taxation. Accordingly, a tax Of 80
cents on 500 was levied against
effective in 1911, just seven days be- |
fore the assessors began their work
and before they could be instructed by |
the Minnesota tax commission. In
1910, under the old law, there was |
assessed In Minnesota nearly $4,000 |
600 Of i~ntangibles. In 1911, the first
year under the new law, the amount
of this class Of property was return
ed at $115,000 900, an Increase of 780
per cent in n year. In 1912 this
same class Of property increased to
$135,0o0,0 600, or 873 per cent in two
years. The assessment Of 1910 repre-
sented but AZ per cent of the bank de-
posts, the 1911 assessment equaled
1873 per cent thereof, while the 1912
assessment amounted to 42.4 per. cent.
The law Of North Dakota provides
that intangibles shall be taxed by uni
form rule at their true value in money!;
that is, they shall not be distinguish
ed from any other class of property,
and that the same rate shall be ap-
piled. .-.t
Let us now consider the facts
and conditions in North Dakota
relative to the assessment of intangi-
bles. Let us define the term intangi-
bile to be all money other than hat of
banks, bankers, and brokers; credits
other than that Of banks, bankers and
brokers; bonds and stocks, not bank
stoc; n shares of capital stock Of
foreign companies and associations.
We thus exclude the banks, which are
otherwise assessed. ,
The first year after the adoption of
the constitution, we find that the
amount Of such tangibles listed for
taxation vas $780, 900. Never again
in the history of the state was such |
a9 amount of in~tangibles listed for
taxation. They were taxed under the |
present law which requires them to
be taxed by uniform rule at their true
value in money. He would be a. very
ignorant man, indeed, who would not