Jasper County Democrat, Volume 23, Number 75, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 15 December 1920 — HEAVIER TAX LEVIES [ARTICLE]

HEAVIER TAX LEVIES

In considering the question of larger state appropriations, which will necessitate heavier tax imposts, the legislature will, of course, do so with the realization that the citizens are already bearing a heavy burden of taxes, and that this is a period of falling prices. The maintenance and management of state institutions and state departments will, as will everybody else, who is not a profiteer, enjoy the advantage of the lower costs. The arguments in favor of increased appropriations have, in a large part, been based on what prices have been, rather than on what they probably •will be, and to that extent must be received with caution. All good citizens are anxious that the state’s departments and institutions should be of the first rank, and are willing to make them so, as far as it is within the state’s means to do so; but high taxes do not make for prosperity, and, furthermore, high levies do not make for full collections. Already fears have been expressed that the increased rates on the greatly increased valuation will result in the sequestration of much personal property, and that, as a result, the state will lose much of the income to which it is entitled. If there is anything to be saved for the taxpayers, it must be in state taxation, as there is small prospect, ■even with the most rigijl economy ol -which Washington is capable, of any

advantageous lowering of the federal taxes. It is probable that, on account of decreases In prices, lower remuneration and unemployment, there will be a decrease In the receipts of taxes both on incomes and excess profits. This, however, will not lessen the burden on the taxpayers, for it will only mean that they have less taxable receipts, jind as they had a large balance of such receipts after the taxes were paid, it means that they are really worse off than they were before. It will be good management if the government can reduce its expenses to the amount of the decrease of such taxes and leave federal tax rates In general as they have been. It Is well enough, of course, for the head of a department or Institution to want to make a record for that department or Institution and Incidentally—or perhaps not incidentally—for himself, but both he and the legislature must remember that this Is largely done at the expense of the taxpayers. They can, no doubt, bear heavier taxes than they are now paying, but the wisdom of making them do so is extremely doubtful; and the attempt to raise large amounts in this way may, to a large degree, frustrate Itself in the resulting sequesteration of property. Perhaps the plans of the departments and institutions are too ambitious; perhaps they are branching out too rapidly; it is even possible that parts of their contemplated programs are as unwise as they are expensive. More may be done with a smaller sum with wise and economical management than with a larger sum with unwise and extravagant management. If further increases of the tax rate result In a sequestration of intangible property, a larger burden will be thrown on real property. A farm or an office building can not be concealed from the assessor. Adequate appropriations must be made for the departments and institutions and especially for the care and comfort of defectives where conditions have been discreditable to <the state and should not be permitted to continue. In general, however, the appropriations asked for can not always be accepted as the measure of necessity. The legislature would better turn its attention to devising methods of greater economy than to increasing tax levies.— Indianapolis News.