Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-03-15

Stubs explained the position of the
department on the matter, that the
law should be kept and showed that
1t il doubtful II the franchise tax on
corporations will ever amount to the
amount received from inheritance
taxes. s.
Tax on lntangiblss
Rep. Gardiner of Gardiner, as a
member of the special committee to
consider recommendations of the
State Board of Assessors for changes
in the tax laws. appeared before the
committee on taxation to advocate
the resolve submitting constitu-
tional amendment to the voters pro-
viding for tax on intangibles, We'd
nesday afternoon. He reviewed the
history Of this agitation for a tax on
this class Of property and called at
tention to the fact that when the
constitution of Maine was being con-
sidered and adopted most Of the pro-
perty in existence was tangible; was
change since then. Today there was
much wealth In stocks and bonds
certificates Of wealth. but there had
been no change in the taxation laws.
which would make it possible to
reach this property.
A. J. Staples Of Waterville. repre-
senting the Brotherhood Of Locomo-
tive Engineers, and an assessor Of
Waterville, favored the resolve. as
did w. j. Thompson. State Master Of
the Grange. Mr.. Thompson said that
the grange would prefer q general
income tax law to this.
Charles S. Hichborn Of Augusta
had charge of the opposition. He
said that his views were too we'll
known on this subject to call for
reiteration at this time. but there
were many people in Maine who were
not in favor Of such a law.
Arthur S. Littlefleld, said that 1t
appeared to him that amending the
constitution was the favorite indoor
sport Of Augusta this winter. He saw
| M necessity OF doing it in this in
stance. What was described here as
intangibles was termed tangible by
congress He declared that there
was in Maine at this time very
good system Of taxing this property.
Men were assessed for money at in
terest. If they thought the tax too
| much they got an abatement: if they
did not regard it as too high they
| paid and that was the end Of the
| matter. Change to the proposed sys-
I tenn and these men would put their
| investments into tax exempt securi-
| ties and the State would lose: also
| it would be wise to figure on an ex-
tension to the State House to care
| for the income tax workers.
| He said that the best way to ball
ance q budget was to keep the ex-
penses down to the amount of your
probable income. Il understand"
said he. that the head of the State
is trying to direct the Legislature SO
! that it can do that"
In conclusion he said that under
| the proposed law the income of the
State from intangibles would be less
, than it now is.
A. s. Woodman OF Portland. repre-
senting several business mems or
CARNATIONS, said that before taking
this step 1t would he we'll to take a
| look at results under like law in
Massachusetts. Before adopting this
law. when they were taxed the same
as in Maine Massachusetts got S.
500 900 from tangibles. The first year
under the law as proposed here it re-
ceived $500. 600 and the second year
there was n slight increase. The
third year il fell off 5000 600 and the
fourth 100000 and last year the in
come from that source was $500. 900.
1t cost about 100000 year in
Massachusetts to collect this tax.