FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 547 
company or individual. An equally bad situation exists where a 
corrupt political organization controls the district and uses its power 
over assessment to reward its friends and punish its enemies. 
: The results of assessment under these conditions have in general 
been unsatisfactory. County assessment has proved subject to some 
of the same difficulties as township assessment, and self-assessment 
by the taxpayer has proved far from successful. There is still a 
great deal of assessment done merely by copying previous rolls, 
thereby perpetuating errors and ignoring changes. Arbitrary adj ust- 
ments in specific cases are not uncommon. The function of the asses- 
sor is frequently misconstrued, leading to attempts to raise the neces- 
sary tax revenues by juggling ‘assessments rather than by leaving the 
matter to be handled by the proper authorities through readjusting 
tax rates. This is a very common practice. In the cut-over regions 
of the Lake States, for instance, the assessments have been raised to 
a point where in many cases assessed value greatly exceeds actual 
value. 
All in all, it must be concluded that the present assessment organi- 
zation 1s inadequate and antiquated. It served its purpose in pioneer 
days when the possessions of the members of society were simple and 
quite readily evaluated. But the modern industrial community, with 
the diverse character of its make-up and the resultant complicated 
problems of valuation, does not lend itself to assessment by local 
personnel, especially where no help or supervision is given. There 
is little hope of sound assessment with perpetuation of the present 
assessing organization. Certainly assessment could be improved 
through the devices suggested above, but the general adoption of 
these improvements under present conditions of organization is 
almost too much to hope for. 
CENTRALIZED ASSESSMENT 
Assessment is an expert job. To appraise values intelligently 
requires (1) accurate information, (2) experience and method, and 
(3) freedom from political pressure. The local assessor usually does 
not have accurate information because he lacks time and facilities 
for acquiring, analyzing, and recording it. Too often he is not ex- 
pected to exert himself to obtain such information. His constituents 
may expect him to produce an assessment which will please, not one 
which is necessarily in accordance with the legal standard. To pro- 
duce an assessment which will please requires, no doubt, political 
sense and a knowledge of human nature, but hardly any detailed 
information regarding values. 
As_ previously indicated, the local assessor is usually without 
experience or a satisfactory method. He is, in most States, an elected 
officer, and even where he is appointed, the appointment is usually 
made for reasons other than the candidate’s qualifications as an 
appraisal expert. 
A centralized assessment by State experts employed under civil 
service rules is recommended as an avenue of escape from the defects 
of the present assessment system. The supervision of this assess- 
ment would be in the hands of the State tax commission or commis- 
sioner or corresponding State authority. The administrative head 
of this body, the ‘‘commissioner’’, as he may for convenience be 
called, would appoint and control the various deputies and experts 
are erence 
ger pee 
