The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1946-12-27
BY J. M. PETERSON


versity recommended that Article
XII, Section III of the Constitution be
changed so as to place the mines OF
the state on an equal basis with al
other property. But pending sucn d
constitutional change, it would ap
pear that section 20S9, which provides
for the method of taxing the net pro
ceeds, could be amended by the legis
lature. Instead of taxing the net pro
ceeds "as other personal property
as provided in 2088 the legislature, it
seemed to a layman, could raise the
levy, which might now be go to three
or four times that amount. Section
20S8, has, however, remained the
same since 1891, being re-enacted in
1895, 1907, and 1921.
In 1921, the people got very slight
break The legislature placed license
tax of Il % on the net proceeds in
addition to the net proceeds tax as
provided for in Article XII, Section
III and Section 208S of the statutes.
By 1924, the people had decided
they had better do some law-making
themselves. That year the voters pas
sed Initiative No. %, imposing a
license tax ON every metal mine opera
tor in Montana (Chapter 211 of the
Statutes) and repeating the license
tax of 1921.
Section 2344.4 provides that the tax
shall be one dollar, together with an
additional sum or amount at the fol
lowing rates: n % of the gross value
of product exceeding $250,000 and not
exceeding 100000; .3/4% for a gross
value of product exceeding 100000
and which does not exceed 100000;
and 10 of the amount by which the
gross value of product exceeds $780,
900 for the calendar year Immediately
proceeding.
The statute provides that the tax
shall be on the total "gross value of
product; that whenever the ores re-
quire smelling, reduction, or treat
ment, the gross value of the product
shall be determined by taking the
market value of all merchantable pro-
ducts in dollars and cents, without
any deductions for costs of smelling,
reduction, or treatment, or otherwise
based upon the average quotation of
the price of such metals, or products,
in the city of New York, as evidenced
by some established authority or mar
ket report, such as the Engineering
and Mining journal of New York City
(. {Sec. 2344.3)
The intent of the voters of the |
state seems evident: They did not |
believe the representative of Anaconda |
Copper Company, Mr. Kelly, when he
said that when mines have been as
sessed for their surface value at
fixed price $3.50 to $4,000 per acre.
and for their improvements, they have
bee1 fully assessed as compared with
all other forms of property.
They believed Governor Dixon who !!
sait that the license tax of 1921 was i
producing an insignificant sum of
revenue The people were determined
that the Anaconda Copper Company
should pay more nearly their just
share of taxes. They had said that the
tax should be on the gross value as de-
termined by the quotations of the
prices of such metals and products
derived, by some authority such as
the Engineering and Mining journal
as quoted above. Is the will of the peo-
pie to be carried out?
The State Board of Equalization did
not interpret the law that way.
For the year 1924, the Anaconda
Copper Mining Company reported that
it had produced from its ores, ten
million pounds of arsenic, refined and
crude. The Board did not accept this
arsenic as a product. In the succeed
ing years, from 1925 to 1880, the Com
pany produced nearly so million
pounds of arsenious oxide white ar
senic), which product was never in
Guided in the gross product" and
hence was not taxed, according to the
evident extent of the law.