OCR Text |
Show GEORGE JEFFERSON GIVES HIS VIEWS ON CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS In an interview with Mr. George Jefferson of MUford, Utah, the Republican Re-publican candidate for State Senator from this district, regarding his views on the proposed tax amendments, amend-ments, we have obtained the following follow-ing statements: "In speaking of the tax amendments, amend-ments, I first declare according to my personal belief, which belief was recently substantiated by the State Republican Convention held at Salt Lake City, Utah, on September 15, 1930, that the proposed amendments were not a partisan political question, ques-tion, but a question that should be J.tudied from every angle in a cool, non-partisan manner, and the people peo-ple should vote on this matter according ac-cording to their best judgment. They did, however, pledge their candidate to carry out the will of the people in this manner, and I reiterate re-iterate that pledge namely, 'I pledge , myself, if elected, to do all-in my power to carry out the wishes of the majority of the people at all times, as promptly, as possible.' -''"As the proposed tax amendments are the most discussed questions before be-fore the people of Utah today, and you request me to state my views on the matter, I submit them, but maintain that they are hot a political politi-cal matter, but an economic one. "I believe that any provisions placed in our Constitution should be short simple and concise, being merely the foundation upon which the legislature should build statutory statu-tory law, giving the legislature a free hand in meeting, changing conditions. con-ditions. "Regarding the proposed constitutional constitu-tional amendment No. 1, relating to the filling of vacancies in the legislature: legis-lature: I am heartily in favor of this amendment as it permits the legislature, legis-lature, if in their judgment, they see fit to provide a method of filling vacancies without the state or district dis-trict going to the vast expense of calling a special election. "Amendment No. 2: This amendment, amend-ment, relating to revenue and taxa tion is the most important of the amendments. It is the opening wedge in the separation of tangible and intangible property and were it 40 statutory law, instead of constitutional constitu-tional law, so that the inequalities could be amended and smoothed out at subsequent sessions of the legislature, legis-lature, I could heartily endorse it. Some of these inequalities are the exemptions and rate limitations. It is true that after seven years the rale limitation can be fixed by the legislature, but I am afraid that should we place an income tax into effect, and it proves a failure, the g people will be sulllciently disgusted with the administration thereof under un-der this amendment, and will discard dis-card it before the expiration of the seven years; but, it is a step in the right direction, and notwithstanding its shortcomings, I intend to vote in its favor. "Amendment No. 3: This amendment amend-ment relates to the State School Fund and tho manner of distributing the same. I most heartily favor this amendment for the reason that I feel tho state as a whole should assist as-sist the poorer counties in the edu cation of their children. I feel that so long ns tho stpte has a compulsory compul-sory school law, it should be the duty of tho stat-.s ; a whole to make it possible to curry out e.icil education educa-tion in every p.i.-t of the state, and equalize the cost thereof. 'Amendment No. 1: This amendment amend-ment relates to the fr.ation of nines and mining prop.-rtv. This amendment is the most discussed of all tho proposed aniendmeuls, a., .til as on.! of the most important to the Interests of every citizen in Utah. In my opinion this question never should have been submitted at this time for the reason that the average citizen of the state has no adequate conception of the intricacies intrica-cies and scientific facts necessary to determine the valuation that should be placed upon mines. The presenl constitution and law is practically as follows: A mine shall be assessed asses-sed on a valuation of $5.00 per acrt on patented land, plus its valuatior of personal property, plus three times its valuation of personal pro petty, plus 3 times it net proceeds. The net proceeds are computed as follows: A mine will produce ore, for example of the value of $100,-000. $100,-000. Then it deducts all production costs excluding the salaries of officers offic-ers and directors. We will assume the cost of production to be $S0,-000.00, $S0,-000.00, leaving the sum of $20,000.-0 $20,000.-0 0 as the net proceeds. Three times the net proceeds would amount to SCO, 000. 00, which added to the acreage and personal property valuations valu-ations brings the total valuation of the mine under our present system. "To disgress for a moment, the legisialure under our present law has the right and power to change the aforesaid multiple of 'three times the net proceeds' at any session ses-sion of the legislature. In other words, our p. sent law ran be changed so that -mine valuations may be raised or lowered at. their pleasure. This constitutional amendment amend-ment proposes that our present law should stand for five years without being changed and then both the contsitutional provision and the statutory sta-tutory law regarding the multiple will be entirely within the jurisdiction jurisdic-tion of the legislature. Under the new proposed constitutional amendment amend-ment No. 2, all other tangible property pro-perty in this state will be valued at full cash value, ie., 100 per cent of its actual value. In my judgment the tax valuation of property throughout the state is on an approximate ap-proximate basis of 50 per cent of the actual value. With the above statements state-ments in mind, I would like to pre sent a comparison of the tax valuations valua-tions on a mine of a certain value and on another class of tangible property pro-perty in order that the attention of the people will be directed to the fact that a change in the present law would he. a serious mistake. For example: ex-ample: ' A mine 60 acres of land at 5.00 per acre $300.00 Personal property valuation 5000.00 Mine produces $100,00.00 Less production cost 80,000.00 Three times net 20,000.00 60,000.00 Total valuation present law 65,300 Total tax at an average of today's tax levy of 30 mills $1,959.00, which is the total amount of tax the mine would pay under our present law. ' Other type of tangible property valued at $50,000.00 Same tax levy of 30 mills .. 1.500.00 which is the total amount of tax this property would pa under our present pre-sent law. "Assuming this proposed amendment amend-ment carried, the mining company would be taxed on the same valuation valua-tion for five years but other tangible property would be increased 100 per cent to bring its tax value up to its full cash value, and on account of the increased valuation of property values in the stale, we should have at least a one-third decrease in the tax levy to raise the necessary $21,-000,000.00 $21,-000,000.00 a year to carry on state business. Hence, our problem now works out this way: Total mine valuation (remaining the same) S65.300.00 Total tax at reduced tax levy of 20 mills 1,306.00 Other property at increased valuation valua-tion of 100 per cent .... S100.000.00 Total tax at reduced tax levy of 20 mills 2,000.00 "Thus we clearly show that un- der the same conditions it will reduce re-duce the tax on the mine in the sum ; of $653.00 and increase the tax on ' the other property in the sum $600. "I believe that the multiple system sy-stem as we now have it, in which ' the legislature has the power to i raise or lower the multiple on the U net proceeds is the correct method ? of taxing mines, because if a mine makes no money it has no net pro-- pro-- ceeds to tax, and if a mine is making money it is paying a tax on it pro-1 pro-1 duction. ie., on its 'ability to pay.'. t It additional burden is placed on ' the farmer and home owner it will -j cause a class hatred between them -'and the mining companies, a result ''which should be avoided at all costs, 9 as the mining companies are the -'largest consumers of farm products. and also give employment to a vast number of our citizens. I am unqualifiedly and absolute! opposed to this amendment. |