| OCR Text |
Show Utah Foundation Appraises Recently Received Surveys of Utah Tax System Publication of a review of Princeton Surveys study of Utah's tax structure has been announced by Utah Foundation, Founda-tion, the private, non-profit, tax research organization. The Foundation notes that Dr. John F. Sly, director of Princeton Surveys, made it clear that their study was not intended to produce a blue print for a new tax structure in Utah. Said Dr. Sly, "We are trying to give you guidance to sound tax policy for the State of Utah. We cannot give you that policy that is a political matter ..." Among the sections of the Princeton report specifically commended by the Foundation review were those dealing with (1) the need for improved and equitable property tax reclassification of property for assessments, (2) approval of the reporting purposes, (3) revision of the unrealistic tax rate limitations limita-tions which now apply to local governmental units, and (4) the emphasis placed on the evils of earmarking (dedicating) revenue sources for certain expenditure purposes. Attacks Some Methods However, the Foundation was critical of some methods employed employ-ed in conducting the study. According Ac-cording to the Foundation review, "perhaps the major weakness of the Princeton Surveys study of the Utah tax system is that it Is a study conducted by remote control con-trol from a distance of 2,500 miles. With local economic, geographic, geo-graphic, and political-sociological environment constituting such overruling factors in the makeup of a tax system, it is simply not possible for a satisfactory study of the scope undertaken in this survey to avoid the hazards of inaccuracy, misinterpretation, and omission of vital factors without extensive on-the-scene research and discussion." The Foundation points out several sev-eral discrepancies which appear to raise serious questions as to the validity of some conclusions in the Princeton report. The lack of reliable and specific information informa-tion concerning the sources of existing ex-isting tax revenue segregated by economic groups is pointed out as one of the obstacles that has handicapped the present as well as previous tax studies In Utah. Foundation analysts were also critical of the lack of adequate study of tax enforcement and loophole problems by the Princeton Prince-ton v group. According to the Foundation, "it would appear that a thorough examination of the existing tax collection machinery mach-inery could lead to such Improvements." Improve-ments." Adopts Some Recommendations The Tax Subcommittee of the Legislative Council met on Jan. 6, 1955, to consider the Princeton Prince-ton Surveys recommendations, approved by the Subcommittee were those which would eliminate elimin-ate earmarking (dedicating) ol revenue sources and would eliminate elim-inate confusion and - inequities In the individual Income ta laws. The Committee also decld ed to prepare bills which woulc (1) Increase the present corpor ation franchise tax rate frorr thiee to four percent, (2) remove the exemption of beer, cigarettes, and oleomargine from the 2ro general sales tax (these Hems have been exempt because of special taxes), (3) extend the mining occupation tax to oil and natural gas, if it is found that that additional revenue will be needed to meet appropriations next biennium. However, the Subcommittee rejected re-jected a number of proposals contained con-tained in the Princeton Surveys report. These included (1) a proposal pro-posal to extend the sales tax to service charges and the sale of motor fuel, (2) a plan for a special tax on partnerships, (3) suggestion for the elimination of Federal tax deductions in computing com-puting state corporate tax liability, lia-bility, (4) recommended changes in the formula for allocating earnings to Utah by corporations which operate In other states, and, (5) a proposal for a state income in-come withholding tax. |
