FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 95 
individual property in the district, that is, each individual assess- 
ment is changed on the rolls. In most States, however, equalization 
does not disturb the individual assessments, but only the total valua- 
tion. The total valuation of each taxing district is reported to the 
equalization board, whose duty it is to make the ratio between total 
assessed value and total market value the same in each taxing dis- 
trict. Thus, the function of the county board of equalization is to 
adjust the total value of each town in the county so that it will bear 
its just share of county and State taxes; and the function of the State 
board of equalization is to adjust the total value of each county in 
the State so that it will bear its just share of State taxes, or receive 
its just share of State funds which are distributed to counties on a 
valuation basis. In those States with town- or township-assessment 
districts, with the exception of the New England States, there is a 
county board of equalization; and in those States with town-assess- 
ment districts but no town board of review, the county board of 
equalization is also a board of review. 
There is a State board of equalization in all but 7 States. claerare. 
Maryland, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and West Vir- 
ginia have no State board of equalization and no State equalization; 
and in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, 
1. e., the remaining New England States, in which the county is of 
minor importance, the State board equalizes assessments only as 
between local assessment districts. California, North Carolina, and 
South Dakota have State boards of equalization, but as there is no State 
general property tax in those States, these boards do not attempt to 
equalize assessments as between counties. They determine the 
ratio of assessed to full value for the various counties, but only for 
the purpose of equitably distributing State funds or for a check to 
determine whether or not the State public utility tax rate is equitable. 
In the remaining 34 States, the State board of equalization adjusts 
assessments as between counties (12, p. 46; 38, pp. 192-195; 50, pp. 
SIA MOSH SOM S16): 
The principal purpose of State equalization, i. e., a just apportion- 
ment of the State tax, is accomplished in Connecticut, and more 
recently in Rhode Island, by a tax on the towns which is apportioned 
according to the amount of each town’s tax levy for local purposes 
instead of the town’s assessed valuation (48, p. 38; 50, p. 69). Thus 
the State takes a uniform fraction of each town’s tax levy. 
The necessity for equalization has been brought about by the com- 
petition among county assessing units to escape State taxes and by 
the competition among township assessing units to escape their just 
share of State and county taxes. One of the reasons for under- 
valuation 1s the common interest of the whole town in a low scale of 
assessments, since thereby the town reduces its share of the appor- 
tioned county and State taxes. The New York State Tax Commis- 
sion (43, p. 28) reports that— 
it [equalization] is necessary because assessors in the various tax districts of the 
several counties value property at such widely differing percentages of full vaJue. 
The 1930 table indicates that in one county property is assessed on the average 
at 95 percent of full value, whereas in another county it is assessed at 33 percent 
of full value. 
Where a State has no State property tax (as in California, North 
Carolina, and Virginia) or apportions its tax on the basis of local tax 
