Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1920-10-20
SENATOR WRITES
OF AMENDM'T NO. ;
Presents Importance of Voting In
Favor Of Third Amend
ment
Sunburg, Mimi, Oct 1lth. 1870.
litor Willmar Tribune.


naturally Interested in it's adoption. l
believe that a discussion of the pro
visions Of the Amendment may be help
full to the readers OF your paper so l
therefore desire to submit for their con-
sideration the most important rroNiS-
ions Of the Amendment in so far AS 1t
permits the legislature to change the the
present law governing taxation. The
Amendment reads in part and there
may be exempted from taxation. house
hold goods, wearing apparel, asrlcul-
tural products in the possession OF the
producer thereof. tools. inducements ana
machinery and all real and personal
property owned by AGRICULTURAL sotir,
ties and used for holding aSricultural
fairs. to such an extent and in such
manner the legislature may deter
mine. Taxes may be imposed upon IN
which taxes may be graduated and pro-
Hressi\e and the exemption OF 4 rea-
Sonable amount OF income may be pro
>ideH. and such taxes may he in lieu OF
Sonal property as the legislature MAY
determine. 1t is noted that the Amend
in the tax laws. but II does give the
legislature the right 10 do so.
Equality III taxation is one great eS-
sential in any TAXING system, but 1t is
always Nittlrult TO establish a general
taxing system that Will produce the r.
suit CAanSts have TIME and again been
made. chiefly for the sake OF equality.
COMPLAINTS AGAINST defects in the per
Sonal property tax are apparently be-
coming more and more lnSlStent. Sub
Stitutlon or an income tax seems to be
getting more and more popular. The
main theory on which an income tax is
based is that taNts should be levied at
rordnS to The. ability to pay rather than
upon the value OF the personal proper
Household Assessments
According 10 our 'classilieu assess
nent law household goods are asses
Std at % per cent OF their true value
1.lN rb,.,,I
amy other as 1t adds an additional nur-
den to the support of the family with
OUT any return IRON the. property Ill
money with which to pay it, The pres
ent exemption OF Slov.ov applies only to
the head OF a family. 1t is pr;,cti-
rallv confined to those having families
and owning household goods anu TO Il
certain desree gives relief TO this class
OF property. Household goods are Very
hard to value. Their sale Value is very
uncertain. no matter what the cost,
medlately depreciate in value. ENEe!-
fence has proven that there is great
inequality in assessing household goods.
Such household goods as belong to the
poor and moderately well-to-do are gen
orally valued at muc! nearer their true
value than those OF the rich and pros
porous, Tor the reason that where the
assessor has little to assess ;,l,i that
little not very valuable. he is more AIT
10 get nearer the tull Value then wller.
he comes into contact with a home
richly furnished with valuable things.
like rugs, pictures and other things the
value OF which he is unfamiliar with.
The assessor finds it rather an enhar-
RAISING task to so through a house and
make d careful inventory and APPRAISER
ment of all the household goods and ef-
tectS and 1t is seldom that he does it.
He is much more apt to make u care
1ul inventory and estimate OF the fur
nlShlnSs in a small and unpretentou:,
nome than in large one. Household
goods now assessed at only 20 pei
va \ hnn
cent OF our tax payers are assessed 1ol
household goods. ExemptinS house
hold goods in the interest OF economy.
AS stated, the assessed value OF house
hold goods is liked by our laws at ="
per cent of it's true value, hence the.
exemption applied d to this class OF prop
erty takes 100000 from the lul vultie
thereof All assessors are required BY
law to return assessments on ali house
hold goods, no matter now small the
amount. This causes u large amount OF
work Tor the assessor tlit SUtS 1ul
nauSht. Except that in has
other personal property, the assessed
value OF his household goods added to
the assessed value OF his other person
al property may exceed tile hunureu
dollar exemption, so it becomes neCvs-
Sary for the assessor to ASSESS 1hcl,l
even though their assessed Value is Ont
hundred dollars or less. In most cases
where a person has less than $iVo.u''
full value OF household goods he has
very little or no otner personal prop
erty. and in such case it is waste o.
money to pay an assessor to make an
assessment against him. \ LARGE part
OF the assessors time is used in asses
sing household goods and they average
only about ~ per cent OF the total as
sessed value of our personal property
and their assessed value is nearly ali
cancelled by the hundred dollar eNenil,-
ton. According to the report OF tht
Tax Commission in 1917, the total as
sessed value for household goods Wa
ABOUT $23,OOO.OUV.
n ~
The total assessed value for all per
sonal property INCLUDING household
figures the one hundred dollar exemption
has not been taken out. Deuucting from
this sum the total taxable value" as
shown by the records of 1871. We have
resents the total OF the eNemptions al
lowed to the heads OF families and am
cunts to more than the total assess
ments tor household goods Further
port of 1917. more than $4,000 persons
were assessed tor personal property.
Not all of them owned household goods
1t is estimated that about )" per cent
OF them did 1t we right i'll this
assumption, it gives us Approximately
$4,000 persons assessed Tor household
goods. Then dividinS the whole amount
of assessed value of household goods
in 1917 by 275,OvO we get an a>eravc as-
sessment OF $500 for household Ioous
against each Of these 2Io.Ouu persons.
Well, then. is it worth While Tor the
assessors thruout the state to spend d
large portion of their time assessln3
household goods where the amount ol
net return is SO small. The asst ssors
would have more time within the time
allowed them to make Il better and fair
er assessment as to other property The
proposed amendment provides that the
legislature may pass d law eNeuptinS
household goods as 1t sees tit. with the
power to pass law providing for it. or
to modify or repeal any laws on this
subject
Injustice in Taxing Grains
We are now taxing grain. Arass seed
flax seed and other agricultural pro-
ducts in the hands Of producers. The
assessment and taxation OF this class
of property causes much complaint on
the part of the farmer. He generally
complains that on assessment day, May
1st, he has only sufficient Of these pro-
lily until the next harvest and care for
his stock until he can turn them out
to pasture The Tax Commission re-
the state on this kind Of property in 1917
was s1,755.226. a very small part Of the
total tangible personal property assess
year. about six-tenths of one per cent.
Farmers feel that it is an injustice to
be taxed on these products and claim
that they. should be exempt: Taking
this position makes it very difficult for
an assessor to properly assess them as
the farmers in many cases are refusing
to list them or sometimes claiming they
do not have any. Many assessors may
sympathiZe with the views of the farm
ers. and it is claimed from official sour
that in many cases whole townships
show no assessment for this kind Of
property. Now. because some sections
assess this property and others leave
it out. makes an unequal assessment
thruout the state and as the law pro-
woes Tor the as asse Ts OF this class
been compelled time and again to order