The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1916-06-10
ENCROACHING ON
A REVENUES

The proposal of the democrats 10
impose federal taxation on inherit
ances in order to make up the de-
fciencies of their ne~ar-free-trade tar
if law as a revenue producer, and to
liquidate their extravagances in ap-
propriating public moneys, has raised
a storm of protest all owe the coun-
try.
All but six states of the Union have
an inheritance tax law. The excep-
tions are Alabama, Florida, Missis-
sippi, New Mexico, Rhode Island and
South Carolina. Upon this tax the
states depend for a considerable por-
ton of their revenue. The Democrats
could hit upon no more vexatious tax
than that of inheritance because the
states believe this to be a subject pc
culiarly within their W purview. As
a state institution it is complicated
enough, but when to those complica-
lions is added the provision for a fed
eral inheritance tax, it is pointed out
by students of the subject that not
only will the cost of collection be
greater than the returns therefrom,
but the interference with state reFe-
nues will be productive of ince5 isn-
pickering and dispute.
AS Mr.. John Harrington, of tbs Wis
consin tax commission points out, n
discussing the inheritance tax before
the American Academy of Political
and Social Science: "The Inheritance
tax is administered in the usual pro-
cess of settling the estate in the pro-
bate court. These are state courts
over which the federal government
has no jurisdiction nor control. With
a federal inheritance tax it will be-
come necessary for federal authori-
ties to intervene in the state courts
to protect the interests of the gov
eminent and collect the tax. The fed
eral government to be effective would
doubtless require its W appraisers,
its own forms of notices, orders, rec
ords, reports and SO on, duplicating
the procedure of the probate court.
All of this procedure must n~ecessa-
rily create a confusion of jurisdiction
and of practice that would be irritat-
ing and expensive to the representa-
tiyes of estates, and that in a great
majority of cases would cause the es-
tate a greater expense than the
amount of tax derived by the govern
ment. 1t would also appear to be an
unwise and improper en-croachment
by the federal government into a just
and proper field of state taxation.
Countless questions arise in regard
to the enforcement of the tax. The
inheritance tax on real estate is due
in the state where located. Where
personal property is owned in a for
eign state it has been held to follow
the residence of the owner. But nu-
merous states have held it subject to
taxation in the state where located,
thus subjecting the same property to
double tax. The federal inheritance
tax would hit this property in one
state or the other, thus subjecting it
to triple taxation. There is an actual
instance in which railroad stock of
the deceased was subject to the tax
in Wisconsin because that was the
state Of his residence; in Illinois, be-
cause the stock was in a safety de-
post box in Chicago; and in Utah,
because the railroad company was a
Utah corporation. Should another
such instance arise, would the federal
tax take a chop at it?
Another thing: There would be no
estimating the probable revenue from
such a tax, on account of the uncer-
tainty of human life. With the con-
clusion of the European war and the
consequent stacking UP of business,
free trade products swapping the
American market and business going
into bankruptcy, the only hope for
succor from this tax which the Dem
ocrats might have would be a national
visitation of the black plague.