The nonpartisan leader. [volume], March 08, 1920, Image 4

About The nonpartisan leader. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1915-1921

Image provided by: State Historical Society of North Dakota

                
1i
Taxes in
BY E. B. FUSSELL
N A previous Leader article it
was shown clearly that in
creases in North'Dakota's state
taxes were not due to the state
industrial program (which
takes only 4.4 cents of each
dollar raised for state.taxes), but were due
to these three causes: First, generous relief
provisions for returned soldiers second, the
need of building up the state's educational
system third, the decreased purchasing
power of the dollar.
This week we intend to look into the taxes
of some other states and_ compare them with
taxes in North Dakota.' It may be a trifle
embarrassing to the politicians in these
states, who have been pointing with hprror
to increased taxes in North Dakota in the
hope that people would forget about increas
ed taxes at home, but it has to be done
First let us take the only three northwest
ern states that enacted soldiers' bonus laws—North
Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin. The North Da
kota law is the most generous of the three, giving
the returned soldiers $25 a month, as compared with
$15 a month in Minnesota and $10 in Wisconsin.
North Dakota raises its money all by taxation on.
the "pay as we go" principle. Minnesota raises
most of its bonus money by the sale of bonds, pay
ing only a small part of it by taxes this year. Wis
consin raised most af its money by taxes but left a
.portion to be paid by bonds.
This is the way the state taxes of these three
states compare:
State taxes State taxes
State 1918 1919'
North Dakota ...$1,690,155 $ 3,676,039
Minnesota 6,107,006 14,400,743
3 Wisconsin 5,087,447 14,055,723
TAX BURDEN IS BORNE
BY ALL OF US
The diagrams at the top of this
page indicate accurately -how the
state taxes of these three "bonus
states" compare, both as to percent*
age of increase and as to the per
capita taxes, or the amount that
__each person in the state would pay
if the total taxes of the state were
divided evenly among the entire pop
ulation. This is an important point.
In the first instance the owner of
real estate or other property pays
the tax. But the owner of a build
ing, in figuring the rent that he
charges a tenant, adds enough to
cover taxes and the merchant who
pays the rent adds enough to cover
the increase, and also his "own taxes,
on the price of articles sold the cus
tomer, so in the last analysis the
general public pays every tax that is ,,
levied.
Now let us turn our attention to
some of the other states in which
readers of the leader live—states
that failed to make any provision for,
the returned service men. To com-'
pare North Dakota's state taxes -with
at ax so he at
?.•' deduct from the North Dakota tax
the amount raised for soldiers' bonus
y* funds. We will also deduct from
Increase
Amount Pet.
*1,985,884 117
8,293,787 -186
8,968,276 176
That doesn't look so bad for North Dakota, does
it? The comparison might have been made even
stronger. Wisconsin certified to its counties, to be
raised as state taxes, a total of $15,
875,865, but some of the counties
chose to go in debt for part of this
amount, raising a total of $1,820,142
by the sale of bonds and thus leaving
the total amount actually raised by
taxation for state purposes $14,055,
723. If we had included the amount
raised by bonds for current purposes
it would have made the increase in
Wisconsin state taxes $10,788,418, or
212 per cent over 1918!
VMmm.
Increase Is Smaller and Per Capita Tax Less, Figures Show
Article ofeHax Series
TAXES IN "BONUS STATES
117 pet. 136 pet. 176 pet.: $4.49 $6.05 $5.45
I -8
Percentage increases in Btate
take? of northwestern states
that "enacted soldiers'
bonus laws.
State
North Dakota ..
Minnesota
Nebraska ......
Colorado
South Dakota ..
Kansas ........
Oklahoma
Wisconsin .....
Washington ....
^Looking over this list two things will strike every
person at once—first, that total state taxes in
North Dakota (soldiers' bonus taxes being deducted)
are less than those of any other state in the list
and, second, that the increase in North Dakota state
taxes is less than the increase in any other state,
TRAPPING SEASON BREAKS RECORDS
•£Sl
a:-
rS**T
,8&»
-.£!?•
.., j^jV 1
t^tv
)h
99
•i
Per capita statetaxes of north-y
western states that
enacted soldiers'
5
bonus laws.
Minnesota and Wisconsin the amounts levied for
Soldiers, so as to make1 the comparison fair all
around. This is what we find:
State taxes
1918
.*1,690.155
6,10'i,006
4,816,640
8,938,940
2,877,880
3,999,995
3,598,958
,.5,087,447
.. 9,240,578
State taxes
1919
$ 2,914,166
11,289,471
7,486,000
5,049,817
8,695,768
6,015,698
6,825,571
7,125,865
11,072,882
-w.
Increase
91,228,011
6,182,465
2,619.860
1,110,877
818,878
2,015,708
2,226,618
2,038,418
1,832,809
with the exception of South Dakota and Colorado.- Wisconsin, so that these states can be compared
In the case of South Dakota a big increase in state fairly with states that made no provision for the
taxes was made in 1918, so it was not necessary to service men,
tfeV
W
I
I^ERE
WfiLL WE
NAIL THE
REST OP
THEM
—Drawn expressly for the Leader by W. C. Morris.
Morris writes us, in sending this cartoon^ "It's a pity there aren't bounties of
fered for this kind of varmints." But the farmera are trapping them, just the
Jies about North Dakota taxes form a good-sized portion of the catch.
„,PAGE FOUB
a
^SlSf
SecondJ
make such a large increase in 1919. A com
parison, taking the three years into consid
eration, is favorable to North Dakota. The
taxes for 1918 and 1919 combined, in South
Dakota, were $6,673,143. The taxes for the
same Wo years, in North Dakota, were
"=$4,604,318. South Dakota taxes for 1919
.increased $1,532,189 over 1917. North Da
•kota taxes for. 1919 increased $1,256,5
.over 1917.
But some critics may be expected to sayi I
"But North Dakota is a small state it is not
fair tb compare state taxes with the larger in
states, with more people."
As a matter of fact many of the neces
jsary expenses of a small state are approxi
mately as great as with a large state. Each
state must have a governor and other state
"officials, a capitol, a penitentiary,-regardless
,of the number of criminals, and other neces
sary expenses. But since this question will'
be raised, let us compare this same list of
states, on a population basis. The latest figures of
population-available are those of the 1919 estimate
of the United States census bureau. This is the
way the same states line up. on the basis of the
^average state taxes chargeable to each individual:
...
Population, TJ. Per capita
S. census esti- state tax
amate for 1919 1919J5S3
817,554
2,378,128
1,309,627.
"f~. 1,040-,842
•£. 753,897
1,896,520
2,465,402
State taxes
1919
2,914,166
State
North Dakota
'Minnesota ...
Nebraska. ...
.. 11,289,471
.. 7,486,000
... 5,049,317
.. 3,695,763 •".?
.. 6,015,698
.. 5,825,571 S
.. 7,125,865
.. 11,072,882
Colorado
South Dakota
Kansas .....
Oklahoma ...
Wisconsin. ..
Washington
OTHER STATES HAVE
EVEN HIGHER TAXES
*8-66 L.
4.74 S
5.68
2,680,800
1.728,757
In this table, as in the preceding one, the sol
diers' bonus taxes have been deducted from the
total state taxes in North Dakota, Minnesota and
Taking the per capita taxes of North
Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin, "S
and including the soldiers' bonus
taxes for all three states, we find the
B.er capita taxes are: North Dakota,
$4.49 Minnesota, $6.05 Wisconsin,
$5.45.
/*,
J-
Even with the soldiers' bonus
taxes included, the per xapita -state
taxes in North Dakota are less than
the per capita state taxes in most of
the'«states that have done nothing
for the soldiers and they are far less
than the per capita taxes of• the
other two bonus states.
The Leader, in presenting*" tax JKt
S
figures £romv the preceding, list __ ...
states, has not attempted to pick and ,T/
choose states in an effort to make a1
favorable comparison. We have 1'
sought tax information from all 13
states, in which the Nonpartisan
league is organizing. From some of
the states we* have had only partial
reports and thus have bedh unable toy
include them in the comparison. -_'*•
For Idaho, for instance, we have
been unable to get the total amount
of state taxes levied in 1919, but the 'f
total tax levy was jumped from 2.5 ..
mills in 1918 to 7.8 mills in 1919, an 'W
increase of more than 200 per cent!
For Montana state tax levies5^
which covered all property in the^^-i
state in 1918 were $4,188,818. For
1919 state officials say they can not
yet produce accurate figures, but onv.
an estimated assessed valuation of
$590,000,000 the 1919 state taxes (in-'
eluding general school taxes as with
other states) will be $5,313,200, an If
increase of $1,124,382. Ejven this will
not meet, appropriations. There is an
estimated deficiency for 1919 of $1,-|:
278,220, in spiteT of increased taxes.
-i.7
.So
Jf