FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 25 
TaBLeE 8.—Range of source distribution of State revenues, by States, 1929! 
Maximum Minimum 
Source of revenue Ratio to Ratio to 
State total State total 
revenues revenues 
Percent Percent 
General property tax__--------- Arizona_-------- 67.2 | Pennsylvania, North Carolina_.- 0 
Licenses and permits_____------ California_-_----- AGNOVIINIG V2 Gain eons aie OMENS ela aL NS 2 
Motor vehicle registrations_--_-_- Oregon___------- PayPlay ae || MINA UCD OY 621) Ges Ua sp FR OE EE RL 0 
Gasoline taxesi2 220-42 2-2 eee Florida_____----- 43.4 | New York, Illinois__._....--.___ 1) 
Deathitaxeswe ee ey De Rhode Island__-- Boo WATS TAT CS Heat e epee MQ ai eR 0 
Special property taxes_-_------- Pennsylvania-_-_ SOS TEN ETS GALES LY ec AU Ck ie EN eA 0 
Income taxes___.--------------- North Carolina_- QA OM SOR SU ACCS Bee een MLO A NRT ne 0 
IROL axes ee ghee ASR EAP Nee te MMe xa sis Mun uagd ives QQ SOV SEACES A eee ee Ny Raa 0 
Other special taxes___---------- Delaware___-__-- 21.1 | California, Texas_....._____-___- 0 
1 Source of data: National Industrial Conference Board, Inc. (8, pp. 112-118). 
While there is no important difference in sources of State revenue 
as between regions or geographic divisions, there are considerable 
differences as between individual States. The maximum differences 
as regards their respective dependence on the several sources of tax 
revenue in 1929 are shown in table 8. 
Gasoline taxes and business licenses are the only sources of State 
revenue which are common to all the States. The failure of New 
York and Illinois to show revenue from the gasoline tax (table 8) is 
owing to the fact that their laws, enacted in 1929, were not in effect 
in time to produce any yield before the close of the fiscal year on 
June 30. 
DEBTS 
The aggregate debts of the State governments amounted to 
$1,577,341,000 in 1929 (3, p. 60). This was less than one-tenth of 
the amount of the Federal debt. The Federal debt was decreasing 
steadily during the decade preceding 1929, while both the State 
and local government debts were increasing during this period. 
Since 1930 the Federal debt has grown enormously. The functional 
distribution of State debts in the aggregate, together with the 
maximum shares by geographic divisions, is presented in table 9. 
TaBLE 9.—Functional distribution of State debt and geographic division with 
maximum share of debt by functions, 1929 } 
Maximum share for each function 
Distribu- 
Function tion, all Haltoite 
States State group d ot a 
group 
Percent Percent 
TIP Way See ae is ee 54.4 | West South Central____-_-_.-----__-_ 76. 0 
Publicnitilitiess 2 eee ee 14.1 | West North Central__.._-._________- 50.3 
IPROLEC ETO Tee AAs CUM SH Net NS 11.6 } East North Central___.__.--__.____- 29. 2 
Socialiwelfare: = Soule eee Pw e 4 New) Wiig lard aa ek See ieee eee 15.5 
Waucatiomees. Waele Palme ck as b eh ale INVPOUMt AM eee eae 19283 
General government__-_-_..----.---------- if 3 eee CL EST aera ae MS ese UL 9.5 
Economic development_____.-..._-.------ MEP ANID ees a (oheae apegiate Yiedee Mapa Ute OF GN eS CN SI 6.2 
Miscellaneous.) io eee Sie L2H ast SouthCentral ae ee 41.1 
1 Source of data: National Industrial Conference Board, Inc. (3, p. 67). 
The State borrowings have been principally for highways. Al- 
though education accounts for over 28 percent of State current ex- 
penditures, only 2.2 percent of the State borrowings were made for 
