34 MISC. PUBLICATION 218, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 
TABLE 15.—Revenues of representative forest and agricultural counties compared by 
source; Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, and California. ! 
State, date, and source | Forest counties | i 
| | 
Minnesota, 1927: Dollars | Percent | Dollars | Percent 
PFOPGELVitaxe- sete ee ee oe 3, 573, 487 65.7 869, 750 | $3.1 
Other\tarves22ess <28 UL Se eee a ONES ew Seen 8, 471 ae 5, 102 «5 
Special assessments: sto2 eee ee esis Se ee 232, O91 4.3 0 0 
Subventions and crantsss se ee ee 1, 386, 759 25. 5 113, 038 | 10.8 
IMiseellaneous e222 ee ies ESE Ree 25, 416 .4 3, 523 | ag 
VBI YRS) RE OL Ra ee MO A SS a AUN ON ee i Sere ee 13, 999 .3 1, 850 iZ 
General departments! 9! 2 28 Se oe ee 206, 211 3.8 53, 133 5.1 
Gross! total ans. etc oman ke NE | 5,446,434] 100.2 | 1,046,306 | 100.0 
afund payments! cesar ee ea eS | 10, 227 -2 114 | (2) 
Neb totale toca sean emai nen 0 ee | 5,436,207} 100.0} 1,046,282} 100.0 
Washington, 1927: : 
IPFODGG YEA a ee oh es Fe a eee 4, 988, 738 | S1.1 | 8, 957, 258 | 70.3 
Other taress ee ee eee ee ee Be 52, 737 8 | 88, 143 | ey § 
Special assessments sas ee ee ee 21, 036 -3 | 968, 685 | 7.6 
Subventions and grants. _- 2-22.22 762, 002 12.4 | 1, 833, 924 | 14.4 
IMiscellancois ae sa een So ig oe ee | 22, 391 4 68, 496 5 
Em Ceres Ge ae EE ES) EE | 46, 987 -8 Q9, 128 .8 
General departments 4 2h ee ee 180, 722 2.9 728, 485 ae 
Public-service enterprises___~_.--.------.----------| 77, 248 | 1.3 0 0 
_ a] PO] eT SSS 
Mota’ Saeed een ene eo ah 4 ea | 6,151,861 | 100.0 | 12,744, 119 400.0 
Oregon, 1927 and 1928:! 
Property: tax oe ee ee ee A ee 8, 436, 486 81.4 | 7, 127, 599 7a 
Special GSSessmen ts ee ew es eee 33, 329 .3 5, 834 1 
Subventions' and erants_ -- 2=- - neo 1, 725, 393 16.7 2, 426, 348 24.9 
Miscellaneous sts CSbw 8 oe eee 165, 001 | 1.6 | 182, 523 19 
Sars ran 
TRO tal 3 he Oa a eee oe tS ee 10, 360, 209 100. 0 9, 742, 304 | 100. 0 
Ole f 
California, 1928: } 
Property tare sce wea hen ets 3, 050, 338 73.1] 6,219,002} 85.2 
Othoeritaxes: 22 21.8 i OE ae eee 12, 755 <8 2, 967 | aif 
Subventionsiand grants. 28 2 ee S74, 854 21.0 806, 184 | HET 
IMiscellaneouses= 02 eee ee eee | 80, 965 | 1.9 $3, 552 | 11 
EM EOTESt sae ee en ee Nay Ses Sa 37, 672 | 29 59, 725 e8 
Generalidepartments 2222. ot ee Se as eee 114, 943 | 2.8 124, 715 E71 
LW eae AER SOR, die eR TP ge AEA Li | 4,171,527 | 100.0} 7,296,145; 100.0 
t i 
1 Sources of data: Columns 2 and 4: Minnesota from county records; Washington from county auditor’s 
reports; Oregon from estimates based on State treasurer’s reports, and State and county records; California 
from records in the office of the State controller. Columns 3 and 5 by computation. 
1 Less than 0.05 percent. 
3’ These figures are for the oe period. 
The property tax supplies from 49 to 85 percent of all revenue in 
the representative localities. The lower limit is found in the forest 
towns of Massachusetts, where many wealthy individuals reside and 
help support local revenues through donations and the local share 
of the State-administered income tax. The upper limit is found in 
the agricultural counties of California, where there are no donations 
to speak of, little revenue from taxes other than the property tax, and 
State aid in an amount below the average. 
Other taxes supply a fairly important share of all revenue in New 
Hampshire and Massachusetts, but very small amounts in other 
States. 
Special assessments are of little importance anywhere, but do com- 
prise 4 percent of all revenues in the forest counties of Minnesota and 
8 percent in the agricultural counties of Washington. These assess- 
ments in Minnesota are largely for drainage purposes and in Wash- 
ington for irrigation. 
eee from miscellaneous sources, interest, general depart- 
ments, and public-service enterprises, are all of minor importance. 
gaa 
