ASSESSMENT FOR TAXATION.
Mr. HART called up the special order, being , his bill [S. 37] to amend Sections 49 and 53 of the act of December 21, 1872, concerning property assessment, with a favorable majority report, which was concurred in.
Mr. HENRY objected to opening up too broad a page: 118[View Page 118] field to defraud the country out of taxes as this ti bill would do, though the principle in the bill is a good one.
Mr. VOYLES offered an amendment requiring a list of the names and residences of all creditors if less than ten, if over ten then ten of the largest.
Mr. LANGDON opposed the amendment because such requirements ought to be simple as can be. It would result in no measure of protection against fraud, and it adds an intricate piece of machinery, which can be of no good.
Mr. BROWN declared the object of the amendment to be to provide against fraudulent representation of indebtedness.
Mr. LANGDON insisted the amendment would not relieve the trouble in the original bill. The State has heretofore been defrauded by the listor swearing his indebtedness was equal to all his claims. The whole theory of taxations upon personal property is wrong. Taxes should be fixed upon property that can be seen.
Mr. BELL regarded this amendment as proper--that indebtedness should be deduced from tax on personal property.
Mr. KRAMER insisted the great trouble with the Assessor is concerning personal property. Many pay too much taxes. The principle of this bill is correct, but there ought to be something to show to whom a man is owing money on which he claims reduction. It ought to be stated in amounts of $100 and over. Boards of Equalization are troubled more than anything else by the listing of personal property. Land is never taxed for its full value--in many cases but two-thirds--while personal property is generally taxed at its value. Under this bill indebtedness to the school fund could be deducted. The names of all creditors above $100 should be given in. By this method it could be ascertained whether or not a person did give a true list of his taxable property. The provisions of this bill are intended to bring about an equitable enlistment of taxable property by the real owners. It would help one large class of people who have no credits from which they can deduct their indebtedness and which compels them to pay taxes on property for which they are indebted.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend the amendment by providing that no deduction shall be allowed unless the person listing shall have a deduction only for the creditors named, and the amount specified as due each.
It was agreed to, and the amendment as amended was also agreed to.
Mr. TRAYLOR was satisfied the bill should not tax pass as it stands. He moved to amend so nothing but bonafide indebtedness can be deducted. Where a man is surety he deducts all of the debt he is surety for, upon the supposition that his co-surety is not good. Even where there are three or five securities, the full amount is as often deducted, and they can not be prosecuted for so doing. As this bill is intended to apply to poor persons, his amendment should be adopted.
Mr. CHAPMAN thought all should labor to get in the bill as little obnoxious as possible, and then it ought to be defeated because its tendency will be to increase the burden on the landed interest of the country, which already bear an undue proportion of the taxes of the country. The bill would withdraw from taxation a great proportion of personal property, which, in the main, at this time. is more productive and better able to stand the burden of taxation. He moved that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. HART hoped that the motion would not prevail. The principle of the bill is to relieve the debtor class, and exempt them from paying tax upon property they do not own. A great many mortgages are held by Eastern capitalists, and if we can not exempt all the debtor class, we should go as far as we can in that direction.
Mr. HEFRON saw but little change in the law of since 1872, and that simply extends the reductions that may be made by a debtor. The trouble is where a man is in debt and nobody owes him he gets no benefits. This bill has another purpose-to prevent double taxation and secure a fair assessment in choses in action. The principle of the bill, as far as it goes. is certainly right. It proposes to secure the State against fraudulent listing of property. If we proceed upon the principle that the people can not be trusted under oath, the statutes had better be destroyed and legislation stopped.
Mr. BELL was of opinion the purposes of the bill are misapprehended, or it would not meet with the opposition shown. The bill certainly takes a long step in te right direction. If there be covering up of taxation, as no doubt there is, it is done principally by persons who loan money, and the provisions of the bill would unearth these gentlemen. He opposed the motion postpone, hoping the bill would be perfected and passed.
Mr. LANGDON proceeded to show where the provisions of the bill would work injustice, giving instances and illustrations.
Mr. WOODS did not desire to see the bill indefinitely postponed, but thought it ought to be recommitted. So much tax has to be raised to carry on the Government,and if tax is taken off personal property it must be assessed on realty.
Mr. CHAPMAN was willing to have the bill recommitted if the author so desired, but as he understood to the contrary, the test vote might just as well come now. The bill would be unjust upon the landed interest of the State should it become a law, for there would be comparatively little personal property listed for taxation; or at least it would cause the withdrawal of millions of personal property from taxation, and to that extent further burthen the rea estate of the estate of the State. To-day real easte in the County is about taxed to its full cash value, and is now yielding but a very small per cent. on the investment. It is out of personal property, largely, that our people are gaining, pecuniarily in these days. No tax law can be an framed which will not in some direction work unequally, and put on some classes of property more or less burden than it ought to bear. The law, which now allows a man to deduct his indebtedness from his credits, works better than the manner proposed in the bill. It will open a wider door for fraud than already exists, and surely throw upon real estate a larger proportion of taxes than it ought in justice to bear.
Mr. KRAMER opposed the pending motion to postpone. The bill proposes men shall not be taxed for that which they do not own, and it provides a remedy for the poorer classes-those who have no credits. If we can correct the great wrong perpetrated upon the people of the State, and the injustice of the present law, the sooner it is done the better.
Mr. COMSTOCK saw apparent in this bill a discrimination against real estate. The weight of taxation is most burdensome when imposed upon unproductive property. The bill makes no change in the law, except allows deductions to be made from personal property.
Mr. HENRY would like to see the bill recommitted. The evidence of indebtedness should be taxed, whether in the shape of a note or bond, or other lawful paper-which understood to be the most valuable kind of property at this time. Let real estate as well as personal property be taxed, minus the sum owed on it. He also favored taxing the indebtedness coming into this State from without.
Mr. VAN VORHIS did not see how the foreign class of indebtedness can be reached by taxation, as the evidences thereof are made payable outside eat of this State.
Mr. HART had no objections to this bill being we recommitted, if Senators think it can be made more perfect. The taxing of imaginary property, of course, is not just as is apparent to everybody.
Mr. CHAPMAN would withdraw his motion page: 119[View Page 119] for the purpose of recommittal. But the bill needs more than amendment. It needs reformation. It should address itself to other feature of the exiting law. Being always solicitous that the author shall have an opportunity to perfect his bill as near as possible, he withdrew his motion to indefinitely postpone, and in accord with the wish of the author, moved the reference of the bill to the Committee on Finance.
Messrs. COFFEY and MACARTNEY offered amendments, which they desired should go to the Committee with the bill. It was ordered. And then a recess till 2 o'clock.
