Show the other side of the tax question editor record the following article explaining proposed P ased amendment no 41 4 r relating tg to taxation ot of mines Is by george H ryan mining engineer and chairman legislative ic g isla committee on tax revision revision and may prove ot of interest to some borne ot of your readers valuation of metal mines tor for taxation purposes cannot be fixed by usual methods because neither the value nor the extent ot of the ore can be determined by any practical method nor can we ascertain in advance of production the probable cost of placing the minerals into channels of trade A constitutional amendment was passed thirteen years ago stating tb that at all mines and mining cl claim a shall be taxed on some multiple or of the net annual proceeds thereof to the legislature was left the fixing of f the multiple as well as the definition fini tion of net proceeds since 1919 the value of metal mines has been deter 1 mined by multiplying net proceeds by I 1 three and against the value thus determined the regular general property tax I 1 levies have been applied this Is a makeshift I 1 plan at best and its only defense Is I 1 that in III some cases it approximates the value arrived at for computing the led eral income tax originally the mining interests did not i wish the multiple written into the constitution I 1 ution because of the uncertain result la instead tend they preferred to trust the legislature legisla ture to fix the multiple this trust has been kept and despite repeated attempts to do so there has been no hange change la in the multiple from that first adopts adopted more afore recently the mining interests have been using every effort to secure a 06 definite guarantee to perpetuate the present system by having the multiple of three written into the constitution these efforts have failed and instead the legislature has proposed to open the way for a more fair and equitable system after january 1 1935 this change Is being fought by some of the operators particularly those who are taxed at low rates under the present system they tire are no longer willing to trust the legislature E experience x per lence has demonstrated the inequity ity ot of this method we hear at all times the statement that it the state Is to prosper and advance we must make conditions attractive for outside capital to come in and develop our natural resources and that excessive and unequal taxation Is the worst de deterrent terren to I 1 investing capital this could be done only if the proposed amendment is passed and the way opened for a fair calr and equitable system which will apply the cardinal rule of taxing according to ability to pay other methods can be successfully employed for example the rate of taxation might be so arranged as to increase when be net income increases instead of decreasing as Is the result under the present system it if the small poorly equipped mine alter after struggling along under many assessments Is fortunate enouf enough h to re reward w ard its backers by becoming a producer in a small email way why s should hould it pay 25 per cent to 50 per cent C of f its actual net income as a state tax when another property with over in net income Is required ired to pay only about 8 per cent our public public records disclose just such application of our present mine tax system they show how unjust our present method Is when the framers of our constitution provided that all property shall be taxed at a uniform rate in proportion to its value they intended to provide tor for a distribution of the cost ol of government according to the wealth of the individual tax payer or according to ones ability to pay why should one property earning in excess of net income pay as little as 8 per cent to the state government ern ment even though it loss does distribute an enormous mount amount la in wages to the people of the state that does not relieve it ot of a responsibility as a tax payer the proposed amendment of section 4 of article 13 would continue the present system of taxing mines until january 1 I 1935 when the legislature could change tub to s nolt some me other plan without having to submit the proposition to a vote of the people thereby eliminating this most controversial question of arbitrarily placing a value on something which it Is impossible to accurately value passage of this amendment will remove from the constitution a piece of legislation which S should hould properly belong solely to the legislature too much legislation has been written into our constitution resulting in inability of the legislature to meet c hanging changing conditions the present mine tax has been a so source of trouble between the industry and the state between the different types of mines and between mines and all other business and individual taxpayers because it relieves the large mine of its just proportion of taxes when it Is in the best financial condition to pay thereby shifting shit ting the load to others it if we aie going to heed the cry tor for equity in taxation if we are going to listen to the plea of our business and financial experts to make conditions within the state attractive to capital let us vote yes on amendment no 4 B H B R |