| Show legislators give opposite views on amendments for the information of the voters of southeastern utah the times independent is pleased to publish below articles by representative W D hammond of grand county and representative charles read of san juan county giving their respective views on the proposed tax amendments which will be doted on at the general election next tuesday both were recognized leaders in the last three sessions of the legislature both took prominent parts in the deliberations of the legislature on the tax problem which culminated in the submission to the voters of the proposed amendments mr hammond opposes the tax program mr redd favors it here we have the views of men who have made more than a casual study of the tax problem we urge every voter to read the articles by W D in considering the proposed constitutional amendments we might well ask the question who or what class of property can expect relief it the amendments should pass the overburdened taxpayers of this state are being told that great relief is in store for them if only the amendments are passed on nov 4 can it be possible that under these six amendments there is athance of relief we can pass amendment no 1 and say vote yes as it Is an economy measure and has nothing whatever to do with the tax program no 2 is the amendment which provides for classification of property income tax and really opens af the constitution ution to provide for several new avenues of revenue but in this amendment there is no provisions for relief tor any tangible property owner true the legislature may pass laws requiring a tax on intangible property but what greater success would the assessor have in listing intangible property than he has under the present law intangible property may and undoubtedly would to a very great extent be removed from the state the legislature may pass laws requiring an income tax the same body may provide for a business tax etc but let us remember that the state of utah cannot collect inome taxes on non residents and a very large portion of the inome in this state goes to non residents who can tell where a business tax would begin or where it would stop are you in business what is bushness busl ness business would have to be defined by the legislature and it is quite likely the man who is now overtaxed would be subjected to a business tax you see amendment no 2 makes provisions for added revenue but there is no relief in sight can the taxpayer jafford to take a chance think it over f the advocates of the whole ta pio gram have based their arguments to a very great extent on amendment no 2 and then ask the taxpayers ts to vote yes on the whole program it seems a fair proposition to let each amendment stand on its own merits just how does no 3 affect the taxpayer without any argument to the contrary no 3 will add more than a one mill levy to your present taxes this Is certain but it is very uncertain as to which districts might receive the benefits of no 3 while talking in logan a few weeks ago dr N jensen state promised that logan district would benefit to the extent of provided amendment no 3 passed it is perhaps well known that no 3 calls for an increase of our taxes which will equal 5 for each child of school age in the state or a fund of something over to be used for equalizing school advantages in the state and it was from this fund that dr jensen promised logan can it be possible that dr jenen can divide this fund so far in advance the amendment says the equalization fund shall be apportioned as the legislature shall provide in considering the distribution of this equalization fund let us not fail to consider the great inequalities of assessments in the different districts of the state it would be well at this time to refer you to the survey of education ih utah page table 21 let us be reminded that this survey was made by the united states bureau of education by order of N jensen acting for the state board of education this table shows the assessed valuation in each taxing district as compared to true valuation which puts thoele tooele at the top with an assessed valuation of 75 per cent of true valuation and it just happens that logian is list in the list with an assessed valuation of 39 per cent of true valuation even though dr jensen has assured logan of a large and handsome gift can you imagine the legislature asking thoele tooele with her 75 per cent of true valuation en the assessment rolls to hand over money to logan with only 39 per cent of her true valuation on the assessment rolls you will no doubt agree that before logan can rightfully martiel continued on page four I 1 by representative charles radd the national bureau of economic research of new york says that the approximate income of utah people averages per year only or one fourth was earned from property three fourths or of this income was earned by salaries commissions fees etc what significance does this have to the taxpayer of utah property earns only or one fourth of the total yet it carries the entire direct tax load for the support of the state county and city governments the other income amounting to goes practically scot free erty such as mines farm lands and equipment homes store buildings and livestock carry the entire tax burden what class of property do you own whose taxes are you paying the tax amendments will bring relief to the people who own tangible property by transferring trans fering part of the tax load to the people who receive the of income it Is intended that every dollar raised from new sources of wealth under the tax plan will be used to reduce the taxes of the property omer who now pays practically all the taxes let me emphasize the fact that the people of utah will not on november ath vote upon tax laws that will change our tax system we are simply voting upon constitutional amendments that will liberalize the fundamental law of our state if the amendments pass it will merely make it possible for the legislature of the future to adapt our tax system to the needs of our state the nature of business and property is constantly changing under our present hard and faba constitution it Is entirely impossible to equalize equal ze the tax burden that document requires that all property be taxed at a uniform rate by theory and experience we know that it is impossible to tax intangible property such as stocks and bonds money and solvent credit the same as other property amendment no 2 Is the important one it provides for the classification of property so that the legislature may if it deems wise place a tax on intangible property and upon people who receive salaries commissions tees etc and those who are doing bubness in the state we may say that it provides for a classification of property and a practical income tax let me mention a few of the people and concerns that are living in utah making their money here and enjoying all the benefits of government they are costing the state considerable money to protect and educate and yet they contribute nothings 1 to the cost of government this class will include doctors lawers all men who receive salaries brokers building and loan companies automobile finance companies and the owners of intangible wealth according to the federal income department there Is more than of intangible wealth in utah this wealth Is practically nothing to the support of government do the taxpayers of utah want to carry on their backs this burden of non taxpayers it Is actually hard to believe that we have stood for this gross injustice so long the taxpayers of utah have been a most patient and indulgent lot one or two examples will be enough to prove the injustice of our system the largest building and loan company in utah with gross assets of approximately has paid in taxes less than the average of 1000 a year it has grown immensely rich and partly because under our antiquated tax system it Is not fairly taxed the president and general manager of the largest public utility in the state said I 1 have made about 50 a year in utah from commissions interest and dividends and have paid less than a year in taxes I 1 live in a rented house under the utah tac system I 1 wa only required to pay taxes on a automobile ard household fum lure I 1 haze three children in scho 1 have fire and police pro my business Is protected and ride secure I 1 understand that tha cost of these things to my family continued on last page W D HAMMOND continued from first page biln the equalization fund she roust i ie her asseem with fact before you can you beve dr jensen can tell logan or other district what they might t from ahls equalization fund y of the districts expecting large j fits from this fund are in similar instances with login district awing Is the list as it appears on of the survey of education teh oele 75 per cent of estimated true atlon that Is assessed wasatch granite 69 jordan 69 salt lake 69 juab 64 emery 63 duchesne 62 morgan pak city 61 north summit 61 th summit 61 devler 53 weber garfield 55 grand kane 55 diute piute 55 provo 55 55 san juan 55 wayne 55 Is 53 beaver 52 box elder 51 h sanpete San pete 47 south sanpete San pete 47 46 ogden 46 washington 46 ard 44 carbon 43 uintah 42 ie 41 alpine 40 nebo 40 logan hy haven t the taxpayers been ini led that before this school fund 1 there willmore than likely a demand that valuations in the pets be equalized and when they i equalized don t you realize that distribution maybe altogether dlf nt than it now appears the only s and certain thing to be said for adment no 3 Is that your taxes be increased ave the taxpayers been informed I 1 goyos state high school id in the same position as the 5 aUz atlon fund under our pre t constitution the state high school d is apportioned among the seva cities and school districts ac to the attendance at the high therein providing the sad bools maintain certain standards ander amendment no 3 the state h school fund will be apportioned i the manner the legislature shall vide to the districts maintaining h schools so we might expect high school fund to be distributed t as the 5 equalization fund is diluted no standards of any kind required under amendment no 3 this building up our educational edards can Is be that a greed for ney has prompted this provision in no 3 before voting yes on no 3 it S well for the taxpayer whether in so called rich district or a poor als act to remember that it no 3 s taxes will be reduced do you e in a district a low kalua n if so what are your chances to in the equalization fund link it over amendment vo 4 does offer relief t for whom there any ques n but that the mines are better able meet their tax burden than any industry in the state they pay their net proceeds while other must pay whether it makes profit during the beir or not and it is proposed that we write into e constitution of the state that the nes shill not be interfered with for least five years all other property be subjected to changes and rc lust ments the mines can stand ide and smile while other classes property sweat under the extra burns heaped upon them from the great inequalities of as as hown above you will adaly sec that something must be me to equalize assessments in the ite and that something will be 0 o lse valuations and as valuations higher it is expected that levies ill go lower we have at present an assessed valuation of 60 per nt and an average levy outside of ties and towns of 30 nulls now if ir valuations are raised to 90 per nt our levy should come down to i mills if no 4 be approved by the you can readily see that we ill lose at least 33 13 1 3 of the taxes now receive from the mines lets vote no on no 4 and it the should go over the mines in face the changes with other prop ty in the state II 11 we pass no 5 we will have but atle me foi a board of county com the state tax commis on will be supreme so far as the tax is concerned in this state tilak if over and if you desire to lace all of your tax matters in the ands of four men in salt lake city ote yes it not vote NO there can be but one objection to amendment men dment to 6 which relates to ie lo caton of the state prison if ills amendment is voted at the prent time it will strengthen the argil lent of those who would remove the rison the question Is whether or biot the state can afford at the present ime to expend for the re loval of the state prison mr taxpayer be assured that the hole tax program Is a well laid to raise more money for the echeme ax spender there Is no relief in store tor the ax payer again think it over R C dark J T learning C S lionson and L L taylor of moab aind harold V leonard of price returned monday evening from a fouray boat trip down the colorado river ey went down as far as lockhart yon about 45 miles deer are ce on the river they state and boat was not overly loaded with enlson on the return trip mr and mrs dave johnson and IT and mrs reuben alien mads a business and pleasure trip to mancos biolo this week CHARLES REDD continued from first page would be in excess of 1500 a year but the tax system has taken less than i why don t utah change its tax laws so it can collect a fair tax on my i 50 yearly income do the taxpayers want to pay the taxes of this and similar men let me remind mr who als I 1 cursed the tax amendments in a recent issue of tills paper that the tax plan does not permit double taxation on intangibles intangibles may be taxed as property or the income there I 1 from either method may be used 1 but only one the business income or excise tax Is intended to apply to ini partnerships and corpora 1 alons doing business in utah this tax will not be confined to corporations as mr suggests I 1 am sure that mr has a mistaken idea of the results of the tax plan the plan should reduce his taxes his property Is of the kind atiat Is now i paving the whole tax bill let me assert that the tax amendments do not contemplate a new or untried system of taxation A tax revision commission made up of three utah men of outstanding and character studied the tax plan for practically an entire year they were assisted by a legislative committee of eleven men they sought information from every state in the union they secured the services of doctor lutz of princeton university one of the greatest tax authorities in the world this plan is the result of their conservative and thorough research the last legislature after thirty days of andl ed study almost unanimously adopted the plan as outlined in the amendments gov dem strongly favors it I 1 that it the people of utah would make the same intensive study of the tax plan that nine out of every ten citizens would vote tor the tax amendments remember that every measure suggested in the amendments has been tried and proven in other states thirty four states tax intangibles twenty have an income tax and each year new states are adopting these methods of taxation remember it is the sole purpose of the tax plan to equalize the tax buri den by distributing it among all the people of the state who have ability to pay the people who receive the will be required to shoulder part of the cost of government the people who receive the 70 who now pay all the taxes will be relieved of part of the load I 1 believe those who oppose the plan fall into two classes they do not understand der stand its purpose and practical application or else they are especially favored by our present system and vant it continued I 1 wish it were possible for me to raise the curtain and let you see men who are vigorously fighting the amendments most of them are fighting the plan because of the favors they enjoy under our preset unjust system in most cases they of men of large incomes men who are best able to pay if the people of grand county want those who receive of our annual wealth to continue to escape taxation they should vote NO on the amendments if they believe the people who receive only 70 of our annual wealth should have |
