FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 131 
TaBLE 42.—Inequality in assessment related to assessment ratio } 
Individual ratios with 
deviations of 
Coefficient 
Group, county, and State? xssessmmene of disper- 
On 20 percent | More than 
or less 50 percent 
Group 1: Percent Percent Percent Percent 
PAS Hn VTLS QVVAIS COLTS IT) Bese eee 93 33 40 
Beaton @Nontny©anrolina) se eeee eee 90 31 45 16 
ETI Cer QVVFISCONSIM) = see wee ir ees sey Oe ye tune 92 30 41 17 
Mayor GWeSCOMSIN) Sh Bie eek coy W lia ae ie LL as 95 21 50 11 
Group 2: 
Horesti QWASCONSIM) 4. Seus 225 2 ek aes ee ee 43 32 24 52 
Grays Harbor (Washington) ___......-_---.---_._-- 48 55 19 60 
Kelamathe(Oregom) ee as eee ee eee 41 44 26 40 
NATICK COTESOM) es es es aa a RE ans SL SP eS ae 35 40 26 32 
1 Sources of data: Columns 2 and 3: Refer to tables 27, 28, and 29; columns 4 and 5; computed from th 
individual assessment ratios summarized in tables 27, 28, and 29. 
2 Group 1 includes counties with assessment ratios close to the legal standard; group 2, counties with 
assessment ratios far from the legal standard. 
Similar results have been obtained in other studies of assessment 
ratios. In Oregon the study previously referred to, involving assess- 
ment ratios based on sales in all of the counties, gives convincing 
evidence of the same tendency. It was found— 
that with a general decrease in the ratios of assessed value to sale value of real 
property in the different counties, the inequalities in the assessments of individual 
properties tended to increase (17, p. 43, footnote 1). 
Further confirmation of this tendency is found in an investigation 
of assessments in Illinois, to which previous reference has also been 
made. A comparison of the 1927 assessment in 10 Illinois counties 
(not including the city of Chicago) shows that the 4 districts with the 
greatest degree of equality are also those with the closest approach to 
legal standard in average assessment ratio (49, p. 62). 
INEQUALITY BETWEEN PROPERTIES OF LOW AND OF HIGH PRICE 
When properties are classified according to price per acre, inequali- 
ties between the different price groups are revealed by comparison 
of their assessment ratios. The tendency to assess properties of low 
price at relatively high ratios has been found almost universal by 
investigators in all parts of the country and is often referred to as 
“regression” in assessment.*® (Regression is also used to mean the 
related overassessment of properties of low value, without regard to 
unit price.) The tendency to overassess properties of low price is 
illustrated for the localities covered by this study in table 43. This 
table has been shortened somewhat, by selecting to represent Wiscon- 
sin the six counties which afford the largest samples in the forest land 
classes, and by omitting the Oregon counties with assessment ratios 
based on unverified transactions. 
36 See the following citations: (4, p. 22; 13, p. 583; 16, pp. 18-19; 17, p. 13; 18, pp. 12-16; 20, pp. 16-19; 22, p. 
18; 89, p. 63; 42, p. 110; 49, p. 34; 59, D. 111). 
