| OCR Text |
Show ROYAL EGCLES SAYS DOUBEE TAXATION OF ESTATE Roya Eccles, speaking of the protest pro-test made by the Eccles estate on a portion of ihe tax to be collected by the state as an inheritance tax. says the estate is protesting a;;anst douhle taxation, aud makes this explanation: " i he theory upon which we pay the state of Utah 28,904.62 under protest is not that we claim aii exemption from general inheritance tax laws on some $578,092.54, but. rather, that we protest the validity of the stale of Utah's claim under its existing statutes to impose the burden of what is termed double taxation. "Several of the industries, of which the Eccles estate is a stockholder, are foreign corporations, existing un der, und by virtue of. the laws of other states These various foreign corporations cor-porations are operating and doing husiness entirely foreign and inde- peuaent to the. state of Utah and in no way are they under the jurisdiction jurisdic-tion of this state. Their operation Is carried on. and likewise the object of their creation are effect, solely in Btates other than Utah, furthermore they have absolutely no property within with-in the state ot Utah and in relation to other states their statutes are the same as if they were individuals and citizens of some foreign country Hence, upon principle, the stocks or these foreign corporations are subject to the inheritance tax laws of these various particular states of which they are creatures. In view of this fact, if the claim of the state of Utah is upheld, there would in effect be the Imposition of double inheritance taxation Primarily, each sovereignty has the power to tax the succession of stocks in the corporations, which were organized or-ganized and exist solely by tbe au- . r ' - -. - 4 - thority of its laws, and, as a matter , of fact with few exceptions, do tax ! such Inheritances. So, if the position I of thp state of Utah is upheld in Its I claim of 5 per cent on $57S,09L,..r)4 worth of foreign corporate stocks, the Bccles' estate will be obliged to stand the burden of Inheritance taxation, not only in this state, but also on principle in these several foreign states. This form of procedure amounts to taxing twice and is contrary con-trary to the spirit of construction and position taken by most all of the states which is to the effect that an inheritance tax law should be considered consid-ered strictly against the sovereign and in favor of the taxpayer, and a doubt as to the taxability of a particular par-ticular fund should be resolved in ta vor of the citizen. "The state of Utah's right to an inheritance tax from the Harriman estate was on the theory that a large holding of this estate was in Union Pacific stock and as the Union Pacifit Railroad company is a corporation cor-poration of this state, the inheritance tax law applied to the succession of this particular stock, but the application applica-tion went no furtber In tbe matter of the Eccles' estate, the decedent was domiciled within the state of Utah and it is for this reason solely, predicated upon the theory of the legal le-gal fiction that the situs of all personalty per-sonalty is at the residence of the decedent, that the state of Utah non- claims a 5 per cent inheritance tax on all corporate stocks owned by such resident decedent, foreign as well as domestic There is no dispute as to the right of Utah to levy an inheritance inherit-ance tax on the succession of stocks In corporations of which it is the creator; on the contrary, our protest goes no further than its alleged right, under the existing statutes, to impose the burden of a second inheritance lax on the stocks held by the Eccles' estate In these several foreign corporations. cor-porations. "This particular legal question has never been brought squarely to the attention at-tention of our supreme court and it is for this tribunal to determine In view of the existing inheritance tax laws whether Utah has the right :o levy this attributary second tax which iu effect amounts to the imposition of double taxation. In application as l well as In principle a double Inherit ance tax is an unjust discrimination at best and in light of the general broad construction given to inheritance inherit-ance tax laws we feel that this double burden is excessive and should therefore there-fore not be Imposed." |
