River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1925-12-24

Pierce County
Increase in taxes due to
personal offset $7,7O737
Decrease in taxes due to
increased exemptions 2,O89.21
Net in crease in Income
taxes 5,618.16
Decrease in property taxes
due to renting mill
taxes to schools 3l897.O9
Net decrease in all taxes
for the county 26,278.93
So far quotations from Senator
Hunt.
| am not quoting figures for tee
other three counties for the reason
that they are all along the sane
order. Hunt gives the total reduc-
ton on property taxes for the four
counties as SLOT ,862.56.
What / should like to know, Mr..
Hunt, is from what source you can
figure the exact amount of Income
taxes for each county in your district
and for the State.
Senator Hunt says that 400 paved
into the state is all used to cancel
mill taxes for school purposes. The
new tax bill does not say so Sec
ton 8 reads as follows:
A new section is added to the
statutes to read: 20,255 out Of the
states share of the proceeds of the
income tax there shall first be set
aside an amount sufficient to meet
the appropriations made by subsec-
tions az and (4) Of section 5000 and
an amount equal to the appropria-
tions made in paragraph (a) of sub
section ~ of section zoos subsec-
ton (2) of section 20 &c and section
20.27. The remainder shall be APP
piled. as far as it will reach, toward
the remission of the taxes on pro-
perty for the support of the unlver-
sity, the normal schools and the COM
mon schools, in the order named and
shall be used for no other purposes.
This shows that some of the state
departments get their appropriations
out of the 400 first and it amounts
to several hundred thousand dollars,
then the remainder shall be applied
as far as it will reach, to cancel
school taxes. By the time proper
corrections are made your sum total
of $107, 862.56 reduction on property
taxes in the tenth senatorial dis
trict will shrink considerable. You
say you have spent considerable time
working out the result of this law.
1t seems that your whole article
is composed of hot air and chat. Had
YOU not better take this lesson over
again and see if you can get correct
answer.
/ see by the bill that the exemp-
tions for the head of the Family in
creased from $1,000 to $1,000 and
from 5000 to $500 for each child
under the age of eighteen years or
any additional person who is actu~
ally supported by and entirely de-
pendent upon the tax payer for his
support $500. This increase was not
in the bill to begin with but was adj
ded to it by an amendment and sup
ported by Senator Hunts vote as the
records show
Senator Hunt in computing the in
come taxes for the state and for the
tenth senatorial District did you take
into account the thousands of pre-
vious income tax payers that are
now dropped off the list. Because of
the increase exemptions and the
many tax payers now get lower
percentage being dropped from a
higher bracket to lower because of
the increased exemptions. You did
repeal part Of the personal property
offset and that may increase the in
come tax for some. But on the other
hand you allow the large Companies
copartnership and person are paying
tax to use it as offset against in
come.
Bill No. ga repeats the $500 ex-
emption on Homestead improve
ments. There are two amendments
offered to this bill in the Senate.
No. / asked to have this take effect
in July LIST, 1927 that amendment
was rejected. Amendment No
asked to have it referred to the vote
Of the People at Spring Election 1926.
This amendment was rejected by II
for and Is against, the change Of one