Page Four 



THE I. A. A. RECORD 



June, 1932 



of nearly $33 in taxes on each of 

 the 214,000 farms of three acres 

 or more in the state. In a number 

 of counties the actual reduction 

 amounts to this much from 1931 

 to 1932 alone. 



Assessed valuations of Illinois 

 farm lands and improvements 

 were cut more than $286,000,000 

 in 1931, it is shown in a survey 

 recently completed. This means 

 that the total assessed values of 

 these farm properties, excluding 

 Cook county, are now approxi- 

 mately 15.9 per cent below 1930 

 values. ,■:, .>;; ::•■;■■.' ■■^:':P'-.. ■:-"'<'' ■^■^'■'- r' 

 ■:r-''v;,;=.x:'". ;;:..::,:;. All Except Six ■:-;■"-/■■■.' 



Every county in the state except 



six received reductions in lands 



during the past year ranging from 



less than one per cent to as much 



as 37 per cent. In some instances 



^ ' land was assessed as much as $20 



to $25 an acre lower. The greatest 



decrease in dollars per acre was 



in Ford county, where $25.16 was 



cut from the old valuations. Re- 



•^^ ductions in McLean and Stark 



counties were $19.84 and $19.83 



V- respectively. , - - > 



Hamilton county reduced land 



values a greater per cent than any 



other county with a slash of 37.5 



l:p'- per cent. Fayette county cut valu- 



-fe-- ations 32.59 per cent and Clay 



r ; -county came next with 30.24 per 



" ; ; cent. Fourteen counties had" re- 



-^i- ductions of at least 25 per cent. 



Valuations of farm lands and 



improvements in McLean county 



were actually reduced more than 



$14,500,000, or from $59,581,775 to 



$44,883,425. In Iroquois county the 



'Cut totaled approximately $11,- 



739,000. 



Even with these drastic reduc- 

 tions in assessed valuations, they 

 are still out of line with present 

 selling values. Figures just le- 

 V leased by the Bureau of the Cen- 



sus show that during the decade 

 from 1920 to 1930 farm property 

 valuations declined 26.5 per cent. 

 Since 1930 there have been more 

 rapid declines in values. 



Piatt county offers a typical 

 example of the influence of the 

 * Farm Bureau tax reduction pro- 



gram. "Taxpayers in Piatt county 

 ■ are paying $107,714 less taxes this 

 year than a year ago because of 

 \ lower assessments secured largely 

 through efforts of the Farm Bu- 

 vv i reau," according to M. F. Walsh, 

 a member of the 1931 Farm Bu- 

 reau tax committee. 



"It was not easy to secure lower 

 assessments," stated Mr. Walsh, 

 "and very likely we did not get as 

 great a reduction as many would 

 have liked or as should be secured 

 in the future. We would have 

 greater effectiveness if we could 

 state that we represent almost all 

 the farmers in the county rather 

 than a little less than half of 

 them. 



Also Lower Taxes 



"We not only got lower valua- 

 tions but also lower taxes. The 

 decrease of $2,808,510 in valua- 

 tions spread over the 275,557 acres 

 of farm lands in the county means 

 an average decrease of $10.19 an 

 acre and an actual reduction of 

 taxes on farm lands averaging 

 3 11/4 cents an acre. 



"It goes without saying that the 

 tenant as well as the owner will 

 benefit from this tax relief of 

 about $50 per quarter section. 

 Credit must be given to local tax- 

 ing units that helped work out 

 such sensible and constructive 

 movements." V; - : 



Thirty-six farms picked at ran- 

 dom from various townships in 

 Rock Island county show how the 

 Pght waged by the Farm Bureau 

 last December succeeded in low- 

 ering farm taxes. All the farms 

 examined except one paid less 

 taxes for 1931 than for 1930. 



The only farm among these 36 

 to show an increase in taxes is 



one of 185 acres which paid $2.88 

 more than last year. The others 

 ranged from $3 to $80 less. One 

 90-acre farm saved $20 on its 1931 

 tax bill; a 320-acre farm saved 

 $40; a 250-acre farm, $14.61; and a 

 160-acre farm, $80.88. 



From $2 to $72 



In a similar test in McDonough 

 county, every one of 36 farms 

 showed a reduction in taxes. The 

 actual doUars-and-cents savings 

 ranged from $2 to $72 per farm. 

 In 10 cases out of the 36 the re- 

 duction was more than $50 per 

 farm. This saving is in the most 

 part accounted for by the 25 per 

 cent reduction in assessed valua- 

 tions secured through the efforts 

 of the public relations committee 

 of the McDonough County Farm 

 Bureau. 



Sangamon county is another 

 example of the influence of the 

 Farm Bureau in securing tax 

 equalization. There the cut in 

 valuations on farm lands and im- 

 provements last year was 26.89 

 per cent, a reduction of $18.88 per 

 acre on the assessed valuation of 

 lands. On a quarter section of 

 land with a total tax rate of $3 

 per $100 the saving amounts to 

 more than $90. 



The following table lists the 

 percentage reductions (or gains) 

 in valuations of farm lands and 

 improvements from 1930 to 1931: 



REDUCTIOIVS (OR INCREASES) IX ASSESSED VAIiUATIONS OF ILLINOIS 

 LANDS AND IIWPROVPJMENTS, 1930-1931 



. Percent- 

 aif e of 

 County Changre 



Adams 18.26 



Alexander 13.27 



Bond 17.34 



Boone 15.40 



Brown 12.41 



Bureau 13.82 



Calhoun 24.53 



Carroll 10.08 



Cass 18.04 



Champaign 15.37 



Christian 14.98 



Clark 14.23 



Clay 30.24 



Clinton 10.47 



Coles 16.47 



Crawford -. .27.76 



Cumberland 20.29 



DeKalb 8.58 



DeWitt 17.20 



Doug-las 19.98 



DuPag-e 15.39 



Rdgar 22.17 



Edwards 10.94 



Rffingham 29.53 



Fayette 32.59 



Ford 29.90 



Franklin 29.07 



Fulton 10.57 



Gallatin 15.98 



Greene 19.34 



Grundy 16.07 



Hamilton 37.50 



Hancock 24.35 



Hardin 11.15 



County 



Percent- 

 age of 

 CbanKC 



Henderson 13.97 



Henry 10.10 



Iroquois 26.78 



Jackson 18.50 



Jasper 26.17 



Jefferson 16.41 



Jersey 4.34 



JoDaviess 1.60 



Johnson 13.09 



Kane 6.82 



Kankakee t0.20 



Kendall 16.43 



Knox t0.003 



Lake t2.94 



La Salle 9.52 



Lawrence 8.68 



Lee 17.04 



Livingston 17.94 



Logan 19.87 



Macon 16.17 



Macoupin 21.04 



Madison 5.80 



Marion 22.13 



Marshall 25.60 



Mason 7.64 



Massac .'....: 11.01 



McDonough 20.90 



McHenry 5.68 



McLean 24.67 



Menard 8.76 



Mercer ...19.67 



Monroe 0.24 



Montgomery 23.47 



Morgan 17.06 



Percent- 

 aife of 

 County Change 



Moultrie 18.53 



Ogle 18.76 



Peoria 10.45 



Perry 28.84 



Piatt 14.85 



Pike 19.04 



Pope ......14.78 



Pulaski 12.97 



Putnam 22.02 



Randolph 10.75 



Richla^nd 13.40 



Rock Island 5.24 



Saline 13.25 



Sangamon 26.89 



Schuyler 23.02 



Scott 8.31 



Shelby 20.67 



Stark 27.20 



St. Clair 15.74 



Stephenson t7.63 



Tazewell 16.79 



Union 4.34 



Vermilion 17.00 



Wabash 25.02 



Warren 19.25 



Washington 14.37 



Wayne 17.30 



White 14.20 



Whiteside 16.35 



Will 19.26 



Williamson t9.68 



Winnebago tO.49 



Woodford 11.92 



N. B. t signs indicate Increases In valuation. 



^ 1 



.''-■x4 



■^ ^'' 



y^* »_ 



*, ^: 



„ 



6 ] 

 in 

 per 

 Lee 

 in 

 hui 

 E 

 wit 

 son 

 hal 

 str 

 Ch£ 

 Th^ 

 17 

 sto 

 thi 



