People's Pilot, Volume 2, Number 24, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 December 1892 — ANOTHER VIEW OF TAXES. [ARTICLE]

ANOTHER VIEW OF TAXES.

The Clhmklch! Principle* of Taxation Stated. f. All persons should pay in proportion to their ability. 11. The tax to be paid by each jwrsun should be certain in amount. 111. The tax should be levied at time and place, to suit tax payer. I J”. A tax should be so levied as to take out and keep out of pockets w icople as little as ‘possible 'above amount required for f public expenditure.

In the previous discussions we have touched lightly upon x the last three principles .as stated above. It is our intention at this writing to look at a phase of the first principle. We will remark in passing that it is this principle above all others which has suffered such flagrant wrongs at the hands of imperfectly devised systems. Equality of sacrifice is a difficult thing to attain in this manifold life of ever changing condition. The phase of the subject which we desire to discuss will be the relation of the farmer to the taxpaying community. Our present system of taxation is known as the property tax. Let us see what the characteristics of this system may be. If we analyze it we shall discover that the “basis” of this system as an object of taxation is frugality or saving. As our system reaches, as it designs only wealth present, expressed in form of property. It does not stop here, but that prosperity which is reached is that, which is visible and all properly otherwise scarely ever reaches the lists of the tax assessor to anywhere its full value. §o it results in this that those whose wealth is expressed in material form, such as houses, lands, stock, etc., are the persons upon whom the burdens of, taxation must fall most heavily. Also it is true that those of large means are the class who most easily escape a full assessment. This is not always the result of dishonesty. but a variation of a few hundred dollars which would amount to some SSO in taxes can be made and not be noticed so readily as the variation of half so large a sum in the list of a man of small means. We have said that our present system reaches property which can be readily assessed. That part which never fails to receive its due amount of taxes is property in land. This the farmer is a large holder as a result of his business. In fact few farmers possess much -which does not find expression in forms easily reached by the tax assessor. This can be so true of those who deal in securities and invisible property, but whose incomes are more certain and lucrative. Again it may be readily conceded that property is the expression of great personal sacrifice in industry and saving How els ecould it find its place. The spendthrift never had a bank account of his own nor a home. Then we can see that our system places a premium upon lavish living because he who accumulates must bear the burdens of taxation.

Let us compare this method further with the great body of men who earn great sums but never lay up to any great extent. We -will take a typical farm. Say of 160 acres. The value of land can be reasonably estimated at $5,000 if the land is good quality. Now in order to properly cultivate that farm a capitalization of considerable amount is necesary in buildings, Stock, implements, etc. Axfpjr-esti-mate of the same can not fall below $2,000 and we are inclined to judge this too little in amount. Yet it is true that many farms of that value are conducted witn less capital. We have here a farmer who is worth in round numbers $7,000. With his poll tax he will pay not far from S7O in taxes to the county treasurer. If we estimate the income of a farm of that size -we will find that it will not be surprisingly large. I doubt if there are many farms in Jasper county which pay over 4 per cent, interest when used for farming purposes exclusively and the majority pay less. Now with our $7,000 farm yielding a four per cent, income we have a showing of S2BO net income for the year’s work. It is by these slow accumulations that he has his farm. This may not apply to the farmer as a class only, but equally as well to all persons ■whose incomes are the result of accumulated property. The rate of income will vary in every business, but the tax will reach the same basis in either case, that of saving or frugality. We will turn our attention for

a moment to another case which is equally as common to us all. I believe in the little town of Rensselaer there are a score of persons whose eirpings throughout “the year are considerable, yet the only tax which appears ! before them is the poll tax. We 'have reference to those persons who receive their income in day , wages. In our larger cities this class is abnormally large.including workmen in all kinds of shops and factories, clerks in stores and offices. These foot up in the thousands. I believe that an average daily estimate of $2 per day would not be too high for this group. Then we have at least S6OO as an income. This may be somewhat high for a number to be included in this list, but when we remember that a large number of the professional class are to be found in this class whose* incomes or salaries range correspondingly high, this estimate can not be too high. As to their relation to taxation. It is a fact too true that this class are not as a rule accumulators of property. So if they pay taxes to any extent it must be upon a portion of their incon e. This class makes it a business to spend all. or nearly all, their earnings. Then we have a class whose yearly income is as large or larger than the farmer who would grade with him and scarcely, if any, taxes to pay. This is because of our pernicious way of levying the tax. Our conclusions are based upon individual facts which are apparent to all and not to be denied. If this was the only objection to be raised it would be sufficient to solicit a speedy remedy so far as practicable. There should be another basis of estimation. Our basis to-day is actual property fa sight or depending upon honesty of the owner to bring it in sight. Why should those persons who enjoy all the privileges any more than the frugal be allowed to escape unnoticed the payment of little more than a poll in taxes? What juctice is there in it! Why should a man be compelled to pay taxes because he is frugal while the one -who spends escapes? Why should not both pay? Doe's not the man who spends enjoy as much privilege in the act as he who saves? Is not our system responsible for all this? These questions if properly answered will shed a flood of light upon what we have said. * *