FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 491 
TAXATION OF PUELICLY OWNED FORESTS 
The forests owned by the Cantons are as a rule subject to the taxes 
levied by the communes but are relieved of those levied by the Can- 
tons to which they belong. The exceptions to this rule include the 
Canton of Vaud where the cantonal forests are exempt from all 
taxation, both cantonal and communal. However it is reported that 
the exemption of these forests in Vaud from the taxes levied by the 
communes is not a serious embarrassment to these local districts, 
since the Canton is customarily more liberal in its subsidies for 
roads and other local purposes to those communes which contain 
cantonal forests. The exceptions to the general rule also include the 
Canton of Bern, where the cantonal forests are subject to the taxes 
levied by the Canton. This arrangement is of course only a matter 
of bookkeeping, as the taxpayer and the tax receiver are the same. 
Communal forests are in general subject to taxes of the Canton 
but ordinarily not to those imposed by the communes to which they 
belong. There are numerous exceptions to the latter rule, and in 
some cases the communal forests are subject to local taxes for certain 
special purposes only, as the church taxes, while exempt from other 
local levies. 
A communal forest located outside of the commune to which it 
belongs is subject to the communal taxes of the commune in which 
it is located. Similarly, a cantonal forest located outside of the 
Canton to which it belongs is subject to the cantonal taxes of the 
Canton in which it is located. 
Information has been compiled for the year 1923 as to the burden 
of taxes on public forests in many of the Cantons of Switzerland 
(270). The figures obtained by that investigation show fairly wide 
variation, both as to the average tax per hectare and the ratios of 
taxes to gross and net income. However they indicate that the total 
burden of taxation on public forests is moderate. In most cases the 
average tax on public forests for all purposes is between 2 and 15 
francs per hectare ($0.16 and $1.17 per acre). The portion of net 
income taken by taxes is usually between 4 and 20 percent; of gross 
income between 2 and 10 percent. The latter figures are comparable 
to 35 percent in the case of the national forests of the United States, 
where the Federal Government pays 25 percent of gross income to 
the States in lieu of State and local taxes (except in Arizona and 
New Mexico where a different method of reimbursement is used), 
and spends an additional 10 percent for the construction and main- 
tenance of local roads. 
EFFECT OF TAXATION ON THE PRACTICE OF FORESTRY 
The owner of forest property in Switzerland is constrained by law 
and custom to practice forestry, and he would find it impossible to 
escape from burdensome taxation by cutting off his timber. The only 
market va ue which attaches to forests, since they cannot be treated 
destructively, is that predicated on the net income which the forest 
will yield when managed as a continuous enterprise. Therefore the 
general situation is quite different with respect to the possible effect 
of taxation on forest management from that which obtains in coun- 
tries where there is little or no restriction on the use of forest lands. 
