Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-01-23


shall secure a just valuation for tax
alton of all property, both real and
persOnal"-COnstitutiO of Indiana. |
When James P. Goodrich, governor Of
Indiana, was advocating the enactment
of the present obnoxious tax law, then
before the legislature, which he said was
"the best ever" he declared repeatedly
that its enactment would have the effect
of bringing forth for taxation seques-
tered intangible property which was not
then on the tax duplicate.
Since the enactment Of the law the
total valuations of no unit in Indiana have
been noticeably swelled by the addition
of any great amount of "intangibles."
A comparison of the returns for taxa
ton made either for or by James +
Goodrich himself is interesting in this
connection. They are to be found In the
office of the assessor of Center township
Marion county.
The personal property assessment sheet
of James P. Goodrich. alleged to show
the true cash value of his personal prop
erty on March 1, 1913, shows items as
follows:
Cash on hand, $500.
Stock in company, incorporated outside
Of Indiana, $500.
Watch, $40.
Automobile, $3.50.
The personal property assessment
sheet of James P. Goodrich, alleged to
show the true cash value of his personal
property on March 1, 1919, shows items
as follows;
Stock in MeIlen Lumber Company Of
Wisconsin, $4,000.
Watch, $50.
No amount of cash on hand as Of this
l. Ohi1n
is returned for taxation.
RECORDS SHOW NO
AUTOMOBILE OWNED IN 1919.
In the office Of the secretary of state
there is kept q record of licenses issued
for the operation Of automobiles in
Indiana Such licenses are issued on
the sworn statement of someone as to
the ownership Of the automobile. This
record does not show that James 2.
Goodrich owned an automobile in 1919.
1t does show, however that state II
cense No. / was granted to Mrs. James
P. Goodrich and that license fee Of
SIS was collected.
There is no record in the office Of the
township assessor Of the assessment OF
either Mrs. James P. Goodrich or of Cora
F. Goodrich, WniCn Is JAS name VI bHe
wife Of the governor.
Comparison Of the two tax schedules
might be indicative of a lot Of things.
1t is, of course, possible that Mr.. Good
rich invested all shis cash on hand on
assessment day, 1919, in the stock listed
among his personal holdings.
1t is, of course, possible that some
time in the year Mr.. Goodrich got rid
Of his $40 watch and purchased new
one Of value Of $50.
It is likewise possible that the stock
8 in the company Incorporated outside Of
Indiana on which he was taxed in 1918
is not the stock returned for taxation
in 1919.
Likewise it is possible. that the value
b Of this stock increased in the year from
z $500 to $1,000
q Of course, Mr.. Goodrich might have
"A sold the automobile which was listed in
s 1918 at $3.50, possibly in the belief that
as governor of Indiana, capable and
u willing of touring the state with a con-
# victed murderer paroled to act as his
chauffeur, he needed a better car,
q POSSIBILITY OF AUTO
Ia OWNERSHIP NO QUESTION.
And, finally, it is entirely possible that
81 the fine Packard which was licensed in
q 1919 is really the property of Mrs. James
" P. Goodrich.
y These facts are only presented here for
consideration in connection with the tax
81 alton problems that are now confronting
- the people Of Indiana.
81 In spite of all that has been said rela-
" tive to the advantages of the new tax law
n IN making it less likely that intangible
a property would be secreted, it is today
y the complaint of hundreds of small prop
Il erty owners in Indiana that their assess
Is ments have been raised to point where,
even under lower rate, they are paying
s. more taxes than they ever did.
81 This, they complain, is contrary to the
# promises made to them when they were
induced to accept the new law. 1t was
said then that the bringing out Of hid
ing Of intangible property would in
= crease the taxing units valuation to such
a IAN extent that the owner of small prop
. sGrty would find his taxes reduced mate
: aaIly, even though his assessment was
Increased, owing to lower levy that would
be made possible.
Owners of real estate, improved or
not improved, have been complaining
loudly that they are bearing the burden
of taxation under the new law as they
did under the old law and that holders
of intangibles, such as leash on hand"
bonds, stocks, etc, are escaping their
share of the taxes just as they did be-
fore the tax law was amended.
Special effort to bring forth intsn-
gibles was made in the last hours Of the
legislature that passed the tax law.
y Among other things that was done was
the insertion Of a clause by which It
was attempted to protect the tax dodg
ers who now listed their taxables against
& the collection of back taxes. 1t is now
asserted by lawyers who have studied
the tax law that as II stands today,
this attemDt TO nrOtect the tax dOd GERS
has invalidated the lien on the real prop
erty for the 1919 taxes This is known
TO be one OF the matters that are re-
garded as necessary of correction by the
forthcoming session Of the Legislature.
In the meanwhile, those who are IA
miliar with the tax duplicates do not
hesitate to declare that there are in
Vulnerable instances still remaining in
which intangibIes have been sequestered,