100 MASS. EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 235 



owners' value. Inequalities between farmers in tiie same town were f-reater 

 tlian in the case of real estate, assessed values varying from 3.5 to 100 per 

 cent of owners' values in many towns. The usual range is from 50 to 75 per 

 cent. Livestock on heavily stocked farms is assessed proportionally lower than 

 on the farms with little livestock. In order to show t!iis conclusively, the 

 farms were ranged in order according to owners' value of taxable livestock 

 (the smallest value at the top, the next smallest second, and so on). The 

 ratio of assessed to owners' value was calculated for each group above and 

 below the center or median farm. The results are as follows: 



Owners' ^'alue Assessed Value Ratio of Assessed 



of Taxable of Taxable to Ozemers' Value 



Livestock Livestock (Per cent) 



Lightly stocked farms .$83,873 $59,143 68.87 



Heavily stocked farms 260,377 1.53,637 5f).f)() 



As livestock in Town No. 7 was assessed at a lower percentage of value 

 than in the other towns under consideration, it was thought that the pre- 

 ponderance of low figures might distort the data. Accordingly, the figures 

 for 50 farms in Town No. 7 were ranged separately, as follows, in order to see 

 if the principle held by towns. 



Owners' ^'alue Assessed Value Ratio of Assessed 



of Taxable of Taxable to Owners' Value 



Livestock Livestock (Per cent) 



Lightly stocked farms $28,224 $16,3.50 57.9^ 



Heavily stocked farms 78,699 37,725 47.93 



It will be noted that the heavily stocked farms are assessed approximately 

 10 per cent lower than the lightly stocked farms in each case. This difference 

 of 10 per cent in the ratios actually means that the lightly stocked farms pay, 

 on the average, 16 per cent more taxes on their livestock than the heavily 

 stocked farms; and for Town No. 7 the difference is more than 20 per cent. 



Assessment Differences as Reported by Assessors. 



The preceding discussion has been based on data from a limited number of 

 farms in five counties representing only 2 per cent of the towns. In order to 

 verify these conclusions and obtain futher information on differences in as- 

 sessment practice with regard to farm property, questionnaires were sent 

 to 340 boards of assessors. Data were asked for as to the usual assessed value 

 per acre of land used for hay, pasture, woodland, orchard, market garden 

 and tobacco, onions and cranberries where grown. The usual assessed values for 

 dairy cows, horses and fowls were also requested. The valuations of hay and 

 pasture land were divided into good, average and poor; the same classification 

 was used for dairy cows. 



Schedules were returned from 133 towns and cities. In most cases real 

 attempts were made to give accurate estimates, although, as many assessors 

 wrote, in assessment practice farm land is not separately valued according to 

 use. Regardless of this objection, many boards of assessors do consider the 

 various uses to which land is put even when valuing the farm as a whole. In 

 assessing land in the Connecticut Valley, assessors in Massachusetts and Con- 

 necticut usually keep a record of the land used for tobacco, and such land is 



