Case Name: In re Assessment of Taxes, Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Company
Court: Supreme Court of the Territory of Hawaii
Jurisdiction: Hawaii
Decision Date: 1905-05-06
Citations: 16 Haw. 802
Docket Number: No. 149
Parties: In re Assessment of Taxes, Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Company.
Judges: Circuit Judge De Bolt in place of Wilder, J.
Reporter: Hawaii Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 802–803

Head Matter:
No. 149.
In re Assessment of Taxes, Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Company.
Appeal from tax appeal court, first taxation division.
Submitted May 4, 1905.
Decided May 6, 1905.
Circuit Judge De Bolt in place of Wilder, J.
Land, buildings, power jdant, track, overhead line, rolling stock, electrical equipments, tools, supplies, etc., assessed as a whole as an enterprise for profit as of January 1, 1901. Returned at $682,-082.80; assessed at $1,109,200; assessment reduced by tax appeal court to $1,351,015.95. Appeal by taxpayer as to excess over $1,000,000. The tax appeal court pursued the method which was held not to produce an excessive result in the ease of this taxpayer in 15 Haw. 3, as follows:
8,000 shares of common stock at the market value of $82.50 ............................$ 660,000.00
3,390 shares preferred stock at market value of $100........"........................ 339,000.00
Total....................... 999,000.00
Less 20%.................... 199,800.00
Leaving..................... 799,200.00
$610,000 bonds, less 5%.................... 579,500.00
Total....................... 1,378,700.00
Less material not in use.................... 27,681.05
Balance............°.........$1,351,015.95
The company set forth its property in its corporation exhibit of December 31, 1903, as of the value of $1,692,267, including franchise and subsidies, $530,000, but it contends that the amounts set forth in that exhibit are a mere matter of bookkeeping and do not represent actual values, and that the franchise has no taxable value. This corporation is young and had begun laying its street car tracks only a few years before and was apparently a growing concern. It had already become able to pay 6% on its bonds, 6% on its preferred stock, 4% on its common stock and lay aside considerable as a sinking fund to meet its bonds when they should become due and its stock when the franchise should expire-twenty-six years thereafter.
Catle & Withington for taxpayer.
A. G. M. Robertson for assessor.

Opinion:
Per curiam:
It does not appear that the assessment by the tax appeal court was excessive. Twenty per cent, was a liberal deduction to be made from the value at which the common stock stood in the market as indicated by ordinary sales in small lots. The tax appeal court, however, made the same deduction-from the market value of the preferred stock, which could hardly be considered as on the same footing with the common stock, and also allowed a deduction of five per cent, from the bonds, although a purchaser would take the stock or property subject to the payment of the bonds in full at their maturity, and they stood above par in the market at the time. No special circumstances show that the assessment should be reduced. Assessment affirmed.