OCR Text |
Show GENERAL PROPERTY TAX as. CLASSIFIED PROPERTY TAX AND INCOME TAX (By GLENN E. SNOW) No. 5 'TTKE Utah stite constitution spe-cifically spe-cifically makes provision for the levying of an income tax which will reach salaries. Why, then, as statesmen, have our leaders lead-ers failed to make provision for one? An income tax is recognized to be the most equitable cf all taxes. The reason we don't have the income tax is because the general gen-eral property tax cannot work in conjunction with an income tax and the general property tax has, in a manner of speaking, the "squatters' " right ; it got here first. The reasons an income tax cannot can-not work together with the general gen-eral property tax are clear on reflection. re-flection. If an income tax was to be administered, the sources of income, in-come, such as salary, interest on profits, stocks, bonds, mortgages and money must be listed before the income tax returns would be acceptable. Such a listing discovers discov-ers at once, of course, all the tangible tan-gible property a person possesses and makes it subject to the general gen-eral property tax. ' For example: One owns no pro'perty discoverable by the tax assessors, but he is given an income in-come tax blank to fill. He is an honest citizen and he attempts to comply; he lists, salary $1603; interest in-terest on -$1000 bond, $50; dividend divi-dend from stocks, $1000 par value, val-ue, $100; etc. If he is single and his income is exempt below $1000, he pays an income on $760, say at 3 per cent or $22.80 to the state, Surely that is not excessive, but when his return goes in, the county officer discovers $2000 intangible assets not listed in the general property tax assessments. In Washington Wash-ington county it would be subject (Continued on page 5) TAXATION (Continued from pace 1) :o nearly a fifty mill tax. He must pr.y in addition to his $22.80, another an-other sura of $l?0. In other words, he is fined $100 for being honest, and since very few others are honest, he feels that it cannot be expected that he be. This situation divorces the income in-come tax from the general property prop-erty tax as it exists in Utah today. On the other hand, if the intangible in-tangible property were declared exempt or if it were subject to a classified property tax of, say three mills, there is nothing to fear from declaration of intanpi-bles intanpi-bles cn an income tax return, for they would not be subject to the $100 general property tax fine; they would pay $6 instead. If the citizens of Utah would rather have $2,100,000 from the $700,000,000 intangible property which now escapes taxation than the pittance from the half million which is now reached and would in addition make an income tax possible, they will vote for the classified property tax amendments. |