The Bozeman courier. (Bozeman, Mont.) 1919-1954, 1924-07-02
The amount of taxes paid that

mehC S237 ,O2S
A total for Improvements and net
proceeds $685.. 593
Total mine and net proceeds tax
paid $16,881
If last year three million dollars
had been invested in farm
lands, the tax would have
beer S39.11S
In stocks of merchandise .-. S43,45O
In banking, the tax would have
been $50, 158
Net Earnings of A. c. NJ. Company
During the early part of 1923, the
great Anaconda Copper Mining COM
pany decided to put out an issue of
500, 900. 900 bonds. to buy additional
copper mines in Chile from the Gug-
genheim interests. On January 16,
1923, the bond issue of Wells-Dicky
company, through its agencies, offer
ed these bonds to the investing bank
ers in a letter stating:
"The net earnings of the Anaconda
Copper Mining company for the ten
years ending December, 1921, before
deducting interest and depreciation
but after paying federal taxes, amount
to $26,O90,408 per year. This is al
most two and one-quarter times an
nual interest charges on the entire
funded debt"
According to the report of the u.
S. Interior department, the val
ue of aIl mineral produced from
the mines in Montana for 1922
amounted to ..... S44,925, $40
And for 1923 ........ $56,656,0O0
Under the met proceeds" dual
system of taxation in Mon
tana the assessed value for
taxation of all metal mines for
1922 was only $790,225
The entire mining wealth of Mon
tana for 1928 was only asses
sed s., 185, 265
Why should one class of property
pay taxes on met proceeds" Or in
come and all other property on its
full cash value?
1t is true that mines pay taxes on
improvements; so does the farmer,
merchant and banker. The mines
are taxed on real estate Eat the price
paid the government for the acreage
for the mining claims when patent
ed" which is $3.50 per acre for placer
ard S. per acre for quartz claims.
Other property n IS taxed on
full cash value, regardless of price
paid the government.
Would it not be just as fair to have
had a clause in the state constitution
| giving land owners the same consid-
. Grafton?
In the case the owner of a 800 acre
homestead would be assessed fol
taxation, the SIG he paid Uncle Sam
at the time he made final proof and
received his patent.
; AS it is apparent to everyone that
T under present conditions in Montana
it is harly possible to elect a legis
= iature in which one or other of the
two houses will not be finally con
c trolled by the big mining interests, 81
Z as to defeat any just mining tax law
= and most people forget that under
+. our constitution it takes a twO-thirdi
= majority in both houses to even sub
t nit a constitutional amendment to re
: zeal the present unfair provision a
to met proceeds" the only alternativ,
= is to initiate the bill providing for
d license tax Of 1% on gross production
< which is permitted by the constitution
The people of Minnesota, after 2
years of struggle, have finally enacte,
a six cents per ton gross productiol
tax on its iron ore deposits.
d More than 80 per cent of the stoc'
o in these Montana mines is owned an
held by non-residents OF Montana
Why should not these nonresident
pay exactly the same fair propositio
l. of the cost Of government in Nor
tana on the mineral wealth owned b
r them as We, who live here in Montan
Is pay on u farms, livestock, bank.
e homes and other business investment
Is A tax of 10 on gross productio
will neither hamper, cripple nor de,
troy any Legitimate mining intere.
W IN Montana. 1t will equalize the DR.,