FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 191 
companies or sold to land companies for subsequent agricultural 
development. The owners continued to pay taxes on it in the con- 
fident belief that it would later be sold to farmers at a profit. Since 
the World War it has become recognized that most of this land is 
submarginal for agriculture under prevailing conditions and has 
practically no marketability. Yet it continues to be assessed as 
potential agricultural land and far in excess of its actual market 
value. 
Overassessment as a result of fallen values is often witnessed in 
the case of an unsuccessful real-estate development or after the 
collapse of a general land boom. To illustrate: Thousands of lots 
purchased at fabulous prices in Florida subdivisions have been 
allowed to go delinquent since the boom collapsed. As soon as the 
owners realized that the speculative values were gone, there was 
nothing to be gained by retaining title and continuing to pay taxes. 
Where extensive public improvements had been made on the basis 
of these exaggerated values, adding heavy special assessments to the 
general tax, the high aggregate tax made the retention of ownership 
even less alluring. It is apparent that each loss from the tax base 
adds to the burden of those properties which remain, thus tending to 
accelerate the drift to delinquency. 
This cycle invariably follows the collapse of a boom. While 
Florida is the outstanding example, the same tragedy has been enacted 
on a smaller scale in many other places. The phenomenon is in 
evidence wherever there has been an abortive real estate develop- 
ment, or any other land promotion in which undue optimism has been 
followed by disillusionment. In other words, delinquency is an 
almost invariable byproduct of deflation, finding its most pronounced 
expression in lands which have mainly a speculative value. 
A general decline of property values, such as attends the present 
depression, is also a direct cause of tax delinquency, even if assessments 
are reduced as promptly and as fully as the shrinkage in value. 
Even in that case, governmental expenditures will not generally be 
curtailed to as creat an extent as the reduction in the value of property 
and the incomes of the taxpayers. In other words, the tax burden 
on property increases at a time when property owners are losing faith 
in their investments. Discouraged because of their loss of capital 
and resentful because taxes continue to be high, they are in a defiant 
mood. They express this defiance by delaying payment of their 
taxes as long as possible. If one owns nonincome-producing property 
he may calculate that the loss of the equity may be no greater than 
the taxes over a period of years. At least he is prompted to cease 
paying for a while and see what happens. If there should be a rise 
in values, he can redeem from the tax lien; if the deflation should 
continue, he can eventually surrender title and escape the intervening 
taxes. Incidentally the fact that his land is delinquent and threatened 
to be lost from the tax books may cause the tax authorities to reduce 
his assessment more than they would otherwise. 
THE SHEER BURDEN OF PROPERTY TAXATION 
It is to be expected that there should be more delinquency when 
taxes are heavy than when they are light, and such is obviously the 
case. 
It cannot be denied that over a considerable period property taxes 
have absorbed a large and increasing share of the income from 
