188 MISC. PUBLICATION 218, U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 
on money borrowed to make up the revenue represented by delinquent items, 
v 
and, above all, to protect the interests of the individual taxpayer. : 
The Bond Buyer (61) in referring to the situation in Florida says: 
There are undoubtedly a few places in Florida that are absolutely unable to 
pay their debts. For the State as a whole, however, what is needed is a continuous 
and rigid enforcement of the tax collection machinery. Property owners should 
pay or forfeit their holdings. Acceptance of bonds for taxes and laws extending 
delinquent dates, removing penalties, or waiving interest on unpaid taxes, merely 
reduce the incentive to pay and prolong the period of bond default. This, of 
course, is exactly what the unwilling taxpayer wants. 
Most of the State legislatures which were in session in 1933 have- 
responded to depression conditions and depression psychology b 
liberalizing still more the terms of tax payment. Some of the legisla- 
tion enacted probably merely validates an existing practice; some may 
be considered only a temporary expedient to meet an emergency; but, 
even so, much of it represents a complete reversal of established 
principles and appears to be wholly irrational and indefensible. Few 
of the session laws had been published at the time these paragraphs 
were written, and the following analysis is based upon information 
given in the current bulietins of the National Tax Association. These 
reports are admittedly based on newspaper accounts and other 
secondary sources and are therefore probably neither complete nor 
free from error. They do suggest, however, the nature and extent of 
this disruptive legislation. 
Moratoria postponing sales for taxes were provided for in Arkansas, 
Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, South Dakota, 
Washington, and Wyoming. The period of redemption from tax sales 
was extended in Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, 
Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Wyoming. 
A lower interest rate for redemption was established in Maine and 
South Dakota. An extension in the time for paying current taxes has 
been granted in Jowa, California, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, 
Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennes- 
see, Washington, and Wisconsin. Discounts for prompt payment are 
to be granted in Kansas, Maine, Oregon, and Utah; and partial or 
installment payments are to be allowed in Arizona, Delaware, Idaho, 
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Dakota, 
Oklahoma, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia. The 
penalties and interest on taxes now delinquent have been waived or 
reduced in California, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Mon- 
tana, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, 
Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Washington; and the payment 
of back taxes by installments over a period of years is allowed in 
Arizona, Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, North 
Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Washing- 
ton. Compromises may be effected under Nevada and Utah enact- 
ments. Lighter penalties or lower interest rates on future delinquen- 
cies are provided for in Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Maine 
Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, 
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming (72). 
In waiving interest and penalties and even granting discounts on 
back taxes there seems to be no consideration for the taxpayers who 
have already paid their taxes and no thought as to the effect of these 
extensions on future collections. These continued extensions and this 
progressive easement of penalties can hardly fail to have a demoral- 
