ARKANSAS, CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, IDAHO, ILLINOIS, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA, SOUTH DAKOTA, TEN- AND FORMER ACTS OF CONGRESS WITH FORMS AND FULL TEXT OF STATUTES BY PETER V. ROSS, of the San Francisco Bar Author of a Treatise on Probate Law and Practice; Formerly m. Williston 1+ COPYRIGHT, 1912 BY PETER V. ROSS SEP 17 1912 SAN FRANCISCO THE FILMER BROTHERS ELECTROTYPE COMPANY PREFACE. Probably no system of taxation now in vogue rests upon a basis more just and equitable than does inheritance taxation; for, in reducing the amount which beneficiaries of a decedent receive, it takes of that which they, in a great majority of cases, have had no part in producing, and which they succeed to at all only by grace of the authority or government for whose support the tax is exacted. The inherent justice of this form of taxation becomes more apparent when it is viewed in the light of such special features as the exemption of gifts or estates of limited value; the imposition of higher rates, or the allowance of a smaller exemption, in the case of strangers and collateral relatives than where lineal descendants and the surviving husband or wife are affected; and the graduation of the tax rate in proportion to the value of the estate or gift -thereby adjusting the burden according to the bounty received and the ability to respond, and also according to the closeness of relationship between the parties, and hence, presumably, the degree of the right to succeed to the property. But however commendable the taxation of inheritances may seem to the unprejudiced mind, adverse criticism, and even untempered condemnation, are not uncommon. These spring from the reluctance, manifested all but universally in mankind, to contribute to the financial support of governmenta reluctance not a whit less inflexible in the presence of affluence and abundant ability to yield contribution. It is true that in some instances injustice has been done in the collection of inheritance taxes. Thus in Illinois the widow's dower, and in California her share of the community property, have been subjected to taxation upon the death of the husband, the courts mistakenly supposing that the widow comes into these estates by virtue of the law of succession. But in other states the courts have discerned the true nature of the widow's dower and community interest, and, realizing that she is not dependent upon the law of succession for them, have not burdened them with the inheritance tax. The injustice she has suffered in these instances, then, is due, not to the system of inheritance taxation, but to a misconception of the law of dower and community property. An injustice is also done, perhaps, through double taxation, where the owner of personal property situated in one state dies domiciled in another, in which case the first state taxes the property because the actual situs is within its boundaries, while the latter state imposes a similar tax because the legal situs is within its jurisdiction. This practice of double taxation has been indulged to a considerable extent, and is still far from obsolete, although it has been departed from in a number of states. But these objections, and others that possibly may be advanced, are accidental only, and do not go to the merits of inheritance taxation. It has so commended itself not only to popular thought, but to the minds of legislatures and courts as well, that it has gradually, and in recent years rapidly, been extended as a system of raising revenue, until now thirty-eight states of the Union are collecting inheritance taxes, and most of them upon both direct and collateral successions. The United States government, however, discontinued its tax in 1902. The subject, therefore, has assumed no inconsiderable importance; and the amount of law that has accumulated thereon, as evidenced by the statutes and decisions, is sufficient to make a volume of ordinary law-book size. The volume naturally falls into three subdivisions. The first is a text or commentary based upon the decisions of all the courts of the country, both state and national. This is written in the usual text-book style, and is intended to bring out all points that have been decided, and accurately to reflect the case law as it now stands in the United States. The second part contains forms for use in the collection and enforcement of taxes. Their author is Edward H. Fallows, Esq., of the New York Bar, who has graciously consented to their use and to whom grateful acknowledgment is here made. The third part contains the inheritance tax statutes of all the states that have resorted to this system of taxation. The full text of the statutes is given as they now stand. The book is not a local treatise. It is intended to embrace all the law on the subject to which it is addressed, both of the United States before the repeal of the war revenue act of 1898, and of the thirty-eight states of the Union that now tax inheritances. These states are: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. San Francisco, July, 1912. P. V. ROSS. |