The fiscal problem in Missouri

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1833271335

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-230042

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: The fiscal problem in Missouri

Place of publication:: New York

Publisher:: National Industrial Conference Board, Inc.

Year of publication:: 1930

Scope:: xvi, 359 S.

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Chapter VI. Tax administration ( Continued)

Collection:: Economics Books

166 THE FISCAL PROBLEM IN MISSOURI 909% of full value, the action of the County Board of Equali- zation in denying relief, and the action of the State Board of Equalization in raising the value of the shares to 100%, of their true value in money, leaving other forms of property on a 759% basis, represented “a deliberate, systematic, inten- tional, and arbitrary discrimination against the plaintiff and its shareholders” and that it was therefore in direct violation of the uniformity and according-to-value provisions of the constitution of Missouri and of the equal protection provi- sion of the Federal Constitution. In this case relief had been sought in a bill of equity, and the Supreme Court of Missouri was called upon to decide whether the taxpayer had invoked the appropriate remedy. The court held that the appro- priate remedy had been pursued, and that the taxpayer was entitled to relief, if the alleged facts were proved. In the light of a more recent decision, it is interesting that no men- tion was made of appeal to the State Tax Commission as a source of relief. The decision in the Boonville case concluded with the following emphatic statement: “There is no reason why bank stock should be assessed at its full value and all other property at 75% of its full value. Such an action is not only a fraud upon the taxpayers who are thus assessed the full value of their property, but it is a violation of the uniformity and due process clauses of our State Constitution, as well as a violation of the 14th Amend- ment to the Federal Constitution. The substantial citizens of Missouri do not want and have not asked for this unjust discrimination as between the taxpayers of the State. Let even-handed justice be done to all taxpayers.” In the Brinkerhoff-Faris case, decided some time after the Boonville case, the Supreme Court of Missouri held, on appeal, that relief from the alleged discriminatory assessment could not be had in any suit at law, and that the bill in equity was the appropriate and only remedy, unless relief could have been had by timely application to some administrative board, and that neither of the boards of equalization was charged with the power to grant such relief! The Court held. however. that it was within the jurisdiction of the 1 BY achat Furs Trust and Savings Company v. Hill, Treasurer, etc., 19 S. W. 2d

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: The fiscal problem in Missouri

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation