Arizona republican., 1922-02-16

of property to exhibit the same to the
assessor; this because the owner
feels that the present laws seek TO
unjustly tax this kind of property.
In all states which have state in
come tax laws IL is found that the
citizens are cooperating in making
such laws successful in the production
of revenue for the reason that the
burden laid is reasonable and just.
MY opinion is that in a compara-
lively short time a large number OF
the states will substitute state in
come tax for the property tax upon
intagible property, and / think Ari-
zona should engage early In the
movement
Inheritance Tax
A defense of the taxation OF in
heritances is superfluous. It's exist
ence in all but few of the civilized
nations. and in all save three OF the
states of the Union. it is CHIEF de-.
fense
Arizona's present Inheritance tax
law is a makesfift, and produces an
nually less than one-third Of one per
cent of the money necessary 10 con-
duct the state government. 1t viii
thus be noted that as revenue pro-
ducer, and insofar as it assists in
Tightening the burdens of taxations
on property, it is failure.
That the underlying principle OF
the tax is a just one is now rarely
questioned It does not. as do many
other kinds of taxation. impose
penalty on either initiative or enter
prise.
messages said: 'T feel that we shall
ultimately have to consider the adop-
tion Of some such scheme as that OF
progressive tax on all fortunes be-
yond a certain amount, either given
In life, or devised or bequeathed upon
death to any individual. The man OF
great wealth owes peculiar obliga-
ton to the state. because he derived
special privileges from the mere
existence of government. Not only
should he recognize this obligation
in the way he leads his daily life,
and in the way he earns and spends
his money. but it should also be
recognized by the way in which he
pays for the protection the State
gives him.
If this were a truism in President
Roosevelt's time, how much more is
It true today, after the creation by
war Of fortunes unheard OF at that
time.
Although political expediency and
social welfare are the principles 10
which appeal may be made IN sup
port of the tax, the actual reasons
for its adoption and extension IN
most states Is doubtless to be found
I'm the every day consideration of the
attractiveness as revenue producer.
Basing my recommendations on the
theory that the purpose OF an in
heritance tax law in Arizona is to
produce revenue, and thus TO some
extent alleviate the already heavy
tax burdens borne by both real and
personaI property. a bill has been
prepared. modeled after that OF the
state Of wisconsin. The percentages
lcarried by this law are midway be-
tween the extremely high percentages
of the California law and the low per-
centages of our present statute. They
are also progressive as TO amount
inherited, bearing lightly on the
nearer relatives and ascending In ra-
ito as applied to a stranger In blood.
Herewith appended Is a tabulation
showing the results OF inheritance
tax collection in nine Of the middle
and western states for the last year
reported 1t will be noted that Cali
fornia stands the highest. showing a
per capita collection OF over seventy
eight cents, while Arizona Is at the
bottom OF the list with only five
cents.
II Arizona's collections were on the
same basis as California. the State
would have received during the past
year. the sum OF $3.50. 100000. instead
Of s17.000.O0.
II Arizona's collection during the
same period were made on the same
per capita basis as our sister state
of Utah, then the amount received
would have been $20o.000.00 instead
of $17,00000.
If Arizona's collections during the
same period had been made on the
basis shown by Wisconsin. then the
amount would have been $4,000, in
stead OF S17.000.o0.