FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 277 
Not all of the differences in taxes per acre, however, are caused by 
variations in the actual value of the properties. A study of tax rates 
and of ratios of taxes to estimated value has brought to light significant 
differences in tax burden due to the manner in which the tax system 
operates. A comparison of tax rates (ratios of taxes to assessed 
value) shows that forests are subject to about the same tax rate as 
other rural real estate. Among the units studied there were five 
exceptions to this statement—Frohn Township, Minn., the towns of 
Laona and Three Lakes, Wis., Baker County, Ores. ., and Grays 
Harbor County, Wash. Here, forests were subject to a higher tax 
rate on assessed value than other rural real estate. 
The ratios of taxes to estimated values, considering forest property 
alone, ranged from 1.2 to 6.9 percent and averaged about 2 percent. 
Thus, while in the wild-lands territory of Maine only 1.3 percent of 
the value of forests was appropriated for the use of the State and 
local governments, in a number of Minnesota townships over 4 
percent of the value of forests was so appropriated. While the 
extremely high ratios found in Minnesota are due to a combination 
of circumstances which are generally not likely to be encountered, 
the evidence is clear that there is great variation in tax burden among 
different political units. An owner of forest land in one district may 
enjoy a much lower tax rate than one in another. Such discrepancies 
are not confined to forest property but affect other kinds of property 
as well. The tax burden on forests was found to be generally greater 
than the tax burden on other classes of property. 
A comparison of the ratios of taxes to estimated value between 
forests and other rural real estate shows about the same level of 
assessment in only 5 out of the 29 political units studied, the difference 
in these ratios being 0.2 percent or less. Of the 24 units where the 
differences in the ratios were greater than 0.2 percent, 23 showed 
higher ratios for forests than for other rural real estate. The average 
ratio of taxes to estimated value was 1.5 percent for other rural real 
estate as against 2 percent for forests. Farms alone were taxed at 
1.3 percent, and the assets of all corporations at 0.9 percent. 
The tax burden on merchantable timber properties is generally 
more moderate than on forests in the aggregate. In the areas studied 
the ratios of taxes to estimated value of timber properties ranged 
from 0.4 percent to 3.3 percent and averaged about 1.3 percent. 
The average ratio for forests as a whole, it will be remembered, was 
2 percent. 
If the tax burden is measured by ratio of taxes to realized income 
instead of to capital value, there is even greater discrimination 
against forestry where deferment of income is necessary. Deferred- 
e ield forests have higher tax ratios than most other types of property. 
he only types that. closely approach such forests in this respect are 
farms and mining properties. While the tax ratios of forestry enter- 
prises that must “start with cut-over forests, when calculated on the 
basis of conditions which were considered normal prior to the current 
depression, amount usually to 50 percent or more, the average tax 
ratio for all corporations in the United States for a recent period of 
5 years (1923-29, excluding 1925) was found to be 11 percent. It 
will be recalled that the tax ratio for corporations is only roughly 
comparable with the tax ratios of forestry enterprises. 
