March, 1936] Rural Real Estate Tax Delinquency in N. H. 5 



town treasury and the property is again Hsted on the assessors' books in the 

 name of the new owner. 



Until recent years many individuals were buying real estate either for 

 the purpose of acquiring it or of securing a return on their investment 

 guaranteed to them under the state laws. Many instances of unfair charges 

 imposed upon delinquents were perpetrated by these individual buyers and 

 naturally no consideration was shown to the delinquent if the buyer had in 

 mind the ultimate acquisition of the property. As a result many persons 

 lost their homes and in some cases became town or county charges. On the 

 other hand, when the town becomes the purchaser of a tax lien, the select- 

 men have the right to abate the tax costs for good reason. If the property 

 is not redeemed and no abatement is made, and a deed passes to the town, 

 this does not mean that the former owner is ejected from his home. On 

 the contrary the town gives him the right to remain as a tenant at a nominal 

 figure and in many cases permits him to repurchase his property on a rental 

 purchase plan. Such sales are frequently made back to the original owner 

 for no more than the taxes and costs involved. Over three-quarters of the 

 towns are now operating on this plan. To assist local officials in solving their 

 tax delinquency problems the commission has been provided with the ser- 

 vices of an agent under the municipal accountant. Under his guidance 

 collectors are urged to keep transactions in connection with tax sales in 

 conformity with statute so that tax deeds for property taken by the town 

 may be valid.* 



Previous to 1930 over 90 per cent of all taxes assessed by towns and 

 cities were collected within the year in which they were assessed. This 

 declined to 81 per cent in 1933, which is conceded to be better than other 

 parts of the country. However, in this same year the current collections 

 plus back taxes collected exceeded the total levy, and the increase in un- 

 collected taxes was small. This would indicate a decided improvement. The 

 record of tax collections from 1928 to 1933 follows: 



Year 



1928. 

 1929. 

 1930. 

 1931. 

 1932. 

 1933. 



Ejffect of Irregularities in Local Practices on This Project 



Field men were requested to report any irregularities or peculiarities 

 in local practices which they observed while obtaining data in the various 

 towns. Although this request was not strictly adhered to by all workers, a 

 summary of the available observations is sufficient to indicate the lack of 

 uniformity between towns with respect to the collection of property taxes. 

 Although state laws are specific, tax collectors and other town officials have 

 not uniformly obeyed them. 



* Twenty-fourth annual report of the State Tax Commission. 



