The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-09-09
Reduce Farm Tax Burden

The city dweller probably feels that there is no better reason why the taxes of the farmer should be decreased than his own. but we know if he was in the position of the man who ekes his living from the soil and had previous urban experience, he would be the loudest of the pack crying for tax reductions. Of course. the subject of tax ation is> such perplexing one that diverse opinions can be held and expressed and yet nothing will be done to remedy conditions. But it begins to look as if the moment for tax reformation had arrived. More and more public officials are recognizing the need of relieving the burdens of taxation by more simplified form of government. We were glad to see Governor Cross was still of the same opinion on the subject as he was when he entered into public duties.
 Speaking at the Goshen Fair, Labor Day, he stressed the need of economy in govern ment. He did the same thing almost two years ago when he was inaugurated. And during his administration he tried to inter- est the Legislature in tax survey of the state. but with no good result. His offer was spurned. Yet today municipal VdSuS 10 dohliS lol tilS oahiS oulNSJ eA"@ the governor proposed so that it can move some of the burden of taxes from the shoulders of the man who has heavy prop. erty awnings. In connection with this we might point out that the farmer is actually land poor for that is practically the only tangible thing that he owns
 We read some pertinent facts about farm taxes in recent address delivered before the National Fertilizer Association at its convention in Washington, D. C. The speaker said that For obvious reasons the farmer does not pay any large amount of income tax. but, nevertheless, he is the most taxed member of the community. Farm lands and farm buildings and farm machinery cannot be sequestered from the assessor in the way stocks and bonds and notes and mortgages and other possessions which are evidences of wealth can be.
 On real and personal property it is esti mated that the tax paid by farmers in 1914 was $292 100000, or almost exactly one third the value of the wheat crop produced that year. In 1891 the wheat crop was almost the same size as in 1914, but its value was only S395,00O,000, and the tax bill on real and personal property had climbed to S775,OO0,000. In other words the tax bill of all our farmers in 1914 rep resented only one-third the value of tn, wheat crop, whereas, in l93l it represented twice the value of the entire wheat crop. .. Incredible as it may seem because of present high taxes and low values of farm products it takes on the average of five times the quantity of farm porduce to pay the tax bill as in the pre-war years.
 One way of course, of bringing down the tax burdens. and the most effective to
 our way of thinking, is economy in the cost of government. This can be produced in myriad of ways with which our duly elected officials are familiar Perhaps more thorough way of effeeting economics in government and one in keeping with the spirit of the times is the elimination of many governmental functions We find the federal government most paternal one in this respect. Why not check this en- croachment and save some money?