114 REPORT O^ THE FORESTRY COMMITTEE 



TAXING NEW FOEEST CROPS 



UNDER this head we are dealing only with new forest crops, grown by 

 the effort of the owner, and assuming that the virgin timber which 

 remains after fire or logging is not sufficient in amount to be considered 

 under our later head of "Mature Timber." We are considering deforested land, 

 presenting a distinct problem to the owner, and that whether he has made money 

 on the original crop has no bearing, nor has his being rich or poor, resident or 



alien. 



All sound authorities agree that the forest crop should not be taxed until 

 harvested. They disagree somewhat as to the degree to which the land tax also 

 should be deferred in order to insure the desired result, as to the extent to which 

 reform should be based on conditions under which the forest owner contracts 

 certain performance, and as to concessions of theory to expediency generally. 

 A consensus of opinion, however, is that the following objects should be sought: 



1. The perpetuation of forests in private hands by wise use. 



2. Greater permanent revenue to State and county than is possible under 

 the present system of destroying the taxable source. 



3. Assurance that the total burden of taxation will have a fair relation to 

 the income obtained, making the tax burden on forest growing as nearly as 

 possible proportional to the burden borne by other kinds of useful industry. 



4. Assurance that the owner will do his share to make and keep the land 

 productive. 



5. Assurance to the owner that future action by the community will not 

 confiscate any property resulting from his effort. 



6. Division of risk, so both owner and community will seek highest produc- 

 tion and safety from fire. 



7. Simplicity in adoption and operation. 



Practically all forest tax reform along these lines, whether already adopted 

 in Europe or this country or now being agitated, . fall under the following classi- 

 fication or are combinations thereof : 



1. Annual taxation of deforested land, solely upon its land value unen- 

 hanced by any growth thereon, with no taxation of the crop when harvested or 

 at most only at the rate then prevailing for personal property. 



3. No annual taxation of the land, but a yield tax upon the harvest at a 

 compensating rate specified now by law (from 15 to 20 per cent is usually sug- 

 gested) . 



3. A compromise between the two above by applying both an annual land 

 tax and a yield tax, each reduced accordingly. Various ways of reducing the 

 annual tax are proposed, a common one being a flat assessment prescribed by law, 

 suggestion varying from $1 to $4 an acre. The best authorities seem to favor 

 fixing it at about half the prevailing rate and restricting the yield tax to 10 per 

 cent. 



Each of these plans is usually accompanied by the requirement of the prac- 

 tice of forestry by the owner. Usually in America they are proposed as optional 

 with the owner, who may continue under the general property tax if he desires, 

 and also with the State, acting through its forestry officials, who may decide the 

 land to be unsuitable for forest-growing. Consequently, they presuppose a com- 



