Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1925-04-03

ly speak on the bill before YOU. The
Dill pertaining to taxation of steam
railroads has been before the com
mittee on taxation for eight or more
weeks. 1t has been carefully stud
led, examined and argued from all
standpoints. An additional hearing
was given on the bill and all who
cared were given a chance to ex-
press their views on the matter.
For a long time there has been q
growing feeling that the method of
taxing railroads on their gross earn
ings was fundamentally wrong, and
that the gross net plan, as advocat-
ed in this bill under discussion, was
the more equitable method. The
National Tax Association, consist
ing Of assessors of all the States,
the United States Chamber of Com
merce and the special Tax Commits
sion Of the State of New York re-
commend the gross net method of
taxing the railroads of the country,
and their recommendation ought to
have weight. The gross-net plan
came before this Legislature in its
original form and which you have
as House Document No. "a. It's
original form calls for a graduated
tax of three percent minimum to five
and one-half percent maximum. 1t
did not meet with the approval of
the committee owing to the amount
of money it would take from the
State. The committee did feel. how
ever, that recognition of it, at least
that the good will of the State
should be given the railroads. Vari-
Gus plans of showing this good will
We're discussed in the committee and
several plans worked upon. After
several executive sessions, it was
the unanimous decision of the COM
mittee to recommend to the Legis-
lature the gross-net plan of taxa
ton of the railroads in a graduated
tax of four and one-half minimum
to five and one-half minimum, thus
offering to the railroads some re-
duction in their taxes and granting
their plea for change in the
method of taxation.
This bill is not wholly a Maine
Central bill. 1t is a bill that ap-
plies to all tho railroads of the
State. If they are prosperous they
pay the maximum amount, five and
one half percent,-and under this
plan there is at least one railroad
| that will pay as much as it has been
| paying under the gross plan and
| just a trifle more.
The railroads, believe would
not be asking for any relief from
this Legislature if it were not for
the sharp competition which they
have from the automobile traffic.
AS to the branch lines to which
Mr.. Cummings refers, the public has
had the benefit of them. Do they
want these branch lines given up?
nj tr, nnc nf
| Maine Central there are branch lines
| which could be withdrawn from the
| public If they saw fit, but they do not
wish to do this. They wish to help
| build up the State Of Maine and
! keep these brar CHI lines in existence.
| AS to the branch to which Mr..
| Cummings referred, l understand
| that is to be given up. and in giving
| that up it means $4,000 more in
| taxes to the State of Maine on &C
count of making the proportion of
! the rails in the State different than
! it is today.
l trust that YOU will give this
careful consideration and will
realize that the committee on Taxa
ton has not made any snap judg-
ment on this, has not been influence
ed in any way, but has given what
they consider a fair report; and l
| trust that the motion of the gentle
man from Portland, Mr.. Cummings.
viii not prevail.
Mr.. CUMMINGS Of Portland: Mr..
| Speaker, I confess it amuses me
| every time I hear a man say that
| the proposed method of taxation is
scientific and the existing method is
not. The reason why 1t is scientific
| is that it lowers the tax that the
road has got to pay, and that is all
the reason. Is it unscientific to take
| from a party who takes >from the
| public a percentage of that which
they make? The existing method OF
taxation on gross receipts is merely
| taking back a certain percentage of
what they have taken from the
people of the State. l do not see
anything unscientific about that at
all.
| Again your tax method, your tax
as they have it on net instead of
gross receipts, why they can so ar
range their book keeping and their
business that there will not be any
| net receipts. The remedy for the
| conditions is a receivershlp ana IL
! has been for years. IL that MAD peen
done, they would not have had to
buv them up and junk them. That
| is what should have been done years
ago and put stop to this thing,
and not have it growing and grow
| ing and taking more and more from
| the people of the State.
| Perhaps some of you are not
aware that the Bangor and Aroos-
| took Railroad, to which the gentle
man from Brewer (Mr. Curtis) as
sumo referred as being road that
would pay as much under the pro-
/ POSED method as under the existing
! rpotbod IL that road had earnings of
| ten thousand dollars a mile last year
ten or eleven, l think it was ten
, had nine per cent net that they
! could have paid in dividends. The
Maine Central, with $4,000 per mile
| gross receipts had not one penny.
/ do hope that the members or
! this House will carefully and fairly
consider this matter. 1t is not that
| | have any emnity toward the Maine
! Central railroad. good heavens !
am a small stakeholder in it. :!
| would like dividends on it; would
like to have the stock worth some
thing: but I am not asking this
! LEGISLATURE to relieve them from
taxation for the purpose of bringing
this about.
Mr.. BRAGDON of Perham: Mr..
Speaker and members of the House:
| realize that we have arrived at the
point when long, drawnout speeches.
are not appreciated by the members
and for that reason / will attempt
to condense my thoughts into very
few short sentences.
I will not attempt to state that our
present method Of taxing the Name
Central railroad is q scientlnc one
but the fact remains that 1t IS the
method that they wanted. Just as