Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1914-02-25
LEADS IN
ATTACK ON BANK
TAXING MEASURE
Says II Would Undo All Recent
Reform of Big Cor
pOratiOns.
MIGHT AS WELL REPEAL
SEVEN SISTERS" HIS PLEA
Bankers Charge They Are Dis
eliminated Against-Sen.
Pierce Defends Bill.


Newark, a member of the commission
Investigating the subject of bank
stock taxation, made bitter attael;
on the introduction into New Jersey
Of the New York system of taxing
/ bank stock
If the State should stand for such
system" declared Mr. Pitney, ii;
might as well repeal the seven sis
ters' law. as If would then be possible
to wipe out the corporations by tax
alton. You could tax the Standard
Oil Company at 100 per cent. and put
1t entirely out of business, and then
you would have Socialism at youl
very door,
The hearing, which was held after
the Senate had adjourned, was
called for the purpose of discussing
Senator Pierce's bill providing for the
imposing of fiat rate of 81 on each
500 of assessed valuation of the stoel,
of banks and trust companies. The
bill was drafted by Attorney General
Wescott, with the sanction of Gov.
ernor Fielder. Representatives from
many large banking institutions in
/ the state were present at the hearing.
supports Pierce Bill.
A. c. Pleydell, of North Plainfield,
| spoke in favor of the Pierce bill. Mr..
| Pleydell, as a member of the COM
| mission appointed by Governor Will
son to examine the methods of tax
alton in this State, said he had helped
| In the presentation of the bill under
discussion to the Legislature.
Mr.. Pleydell argued that the COM
mission which Travelled the State
found that stock of banks and trust
companies in many instances escaped
taxation altogether or the assessment
dwindled from year to year or was
exceptionally low. Only a few years
ago, Mr.. Pleydell told the committee,
the banks were willing to pay much
higher rate than under the present
4 measure. He argued THAT only few
States treat their banking institutions
las justly as is proposed in til meas
lure. The banks in BaltimortJ lie said
Z would welcome this bill with open
arfass becsuse they are paying rate
of ~ per cent. He said the measure
was not eontiscatory, as alleged by
the opponents of the measure. While
the banks are said to be unit
against this bill, they were not unit
in favor of the Buck act. he argued
| The rate of taxation in the bill was
agreed upon, he said, as compromise
agreement and added that 81 had been
agreed upon as the legal rate in sew
eral States.
Pierce Speaks in Defense.
Bankers from all parts of the State
opposed the measure at the session
this afternoon alleging that its effect
mould r,,aan :. % nor oa.t ,-ad,,offor
of the surplus of some of the banks.
| The proposed law was denounced as
special legislation because it singled
out the banks for the imposition of
the tax. Objection was also made to
the provision of the bill giving one
half of the tax to the municipality
| in which the bank is located and the
other half TO the county. One of
the speakers insisted that the motive
of the bill was evidently to tighten
the burden of a state tax, but the
| bill was aiming in the wrong direc-
ton. The bill according to the bank
ers would give to the counties addi-
tional revenues to which they are not
entitled and which would be surplus
upon their hands to expend on the
projects the county authorities deemed
proper.
Senator Pierce said few words In
commendation of the measure, par
ticularly with reference to the rate of
taxation imposed on the banks. The
rate of taxation, he maintained,
would remain stationary, while the
local rates would evidently increase
according to conditions. The rate
on bank stock, he said, would be
more favorable to the bankers as
time went on.
William G. Heppenheimer, of Jer-
sey City. chairman of the legislative
committee of the New Jersey Bank
ers' Association. spoke briefly against
any change in the present bank stock
tax laws. He declared that the bank
ers of the State were a unit in oppo-
sition to these bills. The present
laws, he maintained. are absolutely
equal taxation for corporations and
individuals and should not be dis
turbed. He then introduced Willard
C. Fisk, of Jersey City, counsel for
the State Bankers Association, who
made the chief argument against the
bills.
He maintained that the present
laws allow no special exemptions not
permitted to other corporations or
individuals. The Buck act, he in
sisted, puts bank stock on a par with
all other property for taxation pur-
poses.
says Its Discrimination.
1.-The bankers of the State he con-
tinued. failed to see why they should
be selected for special legislation as a
matter OF direct taxation and should
be Disseminated against, as is pro-
vided in this proposed legislation"
Senator Pierce interjected that the
present law permits a double eXemp-
tion, as the stockholders may make
certain deductions and the bank may
also deduct its non taxable securities.
Mr.. Fisk claimed that this was not
the practical working of the law. and
said that the real effect of the present
the real estate of all the banks.
Senator Pierce thought that if bank
ing capital be properly employed there
is no double taxation or discrimina-
tion. Replying to Mr. Fisk, his argu-
ment was that if banks voluntarily
invested in certain classes of securi-
ties they should not be exempted from
tax on that account. He asked Mr..
Fisk if il was considered proper bank
ing for a bank to invest its capital in
real estate, such as a large office
building. Mr.. Fisk said it was proper
up to certain limitations.
Senator Pierce brought out the point
that the commission of which Mr.
Pitney was a member had recon-
mended a bin modifying bank stock
bank would be taxable.
David ssperstein.
Recital. New Auditorium. Friday t;f5 p. M