« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
to taxation on their capital, which have a principal office within this State. People ex rel. Bay State, etc., Co. v. McLean, 80 N. Y. 254 (1880); affirming 17 Hun, 204.
The location of the principal financial office of a corporation doing business in different places, indicated in its certificate, determines the place where it should be taxed. Peter Cooper's Glue Factory v. McMahon, 15 Abb. N. C. 314 (1885).
The provisions of Laws 1859, chap. 388, "to make corporations in the city of Buffalo taxable the same as corporations in other cities" - held, not to change the general rule as to taxation on personalty where the principal office is located. In case of a corporation formed under Laws 1854, chap. 252, to navigate the lakes and rivers, the designation in the certificate of the place in which its principal office is to be located, is conclusive as to its personalty. A designation in terms, the "principal office for managing the affairs of such company"-held sufficient. Union Steamboat Co. v. Buffalo, 82 N. Y. 351 (1880).
The place named in its certificate of incorporation as that where the operations of the company are to be carried on, is its situs for taxation of its personal property. Chesebrough Manuf. Co. v. Coleman, 44 Hun, 545 (1837).
The actual residence of a corporation for the purpose of transacting its business governs, rather than the place of filing its certificate of incorporation. Austen v. Telephone Co., 8 Misc. 11; S. C., 58 N. Y. St. Repr. 306; 28 N. Y. Supp. 77 (1894).
An affidavit by the president of a corporation in opposition to a motion for an order imposing a fine upon it for failure to pay a personal tax in New York city, to the effect that its place of business, as designated in its certificate of incorporation, was in Westchester,- held, to be overcome by his sworn statement to the commissioners of taxes of New York that its principal office was in the city of New York. McLean v. Couper Milling Co. 38 N. Y. St. Repr. 893; S. C., 14 N. Y. Supp. 509 (1891).
A corporation assessed for amount of its capital stock in New York city filed a statement with the assessors there, naming that city as its principal place of business, and appeared before them and obtained a reduction of its assessment. Held, that it could not claim in proceedings to compel payment out of the tax that it was a nonresident of the city and so the assessors had no jurisdiction. Matter of McLean, 138 N. Y. 158; S. C., 51 N. Y. St. Repr. 837; affg. 66 Hun, 122; S. C., 49 N. Y. St. Repr. 601; 20 N. Y. Supp. 821 (1893).
Where the act of 1848, under which a corporation was organized, did not require that it should be stated in the articles where the principal office should be established,- held, that the statement that it was to be in a certain place was not conclusive, but its actual principal place of business determined its residence. Held, also, that it was competent for the corporation in such case to remove and change its place of residence.
Austen v. Telephone Co., 73 Hun, 96; S. C., 56 N. Y. St. Repr. 79; 25 N. Y. Supp. 916 (1893).
Cars on a railroad the owner of which is domiciled without the State, held not exempt from local taxation by reason of being instrumentalities used exclusively for interstate commerce. Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. Twombly, 29 Fed. Repr. 658 (1887).
The personal property, within this State, of corporations, whether domestic or foreign, is taxed at the place where its principal office, within this State, is located, without regard to the particular situs of the property. The People ex rel. The Keystone Gas Co. v. The Assessors of Olean, 15 N. Y. St. Repr. 461 (1888), G. T.
On the situs of rolling stock for purposes of taxation, see Marye v. Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co., 127 U. S. 117 (1888).
§ 12. Taxation of corporate stock.—The capital stock of every company liable to taxation, except such part of it as shall have been excepted in the assessment-roll or shall be exempt by law, together with its surplus profits or reserve funds exceeding ten per centum of its capital, after deducting the assessed value of its real estate, and all shares of stock in other corporations actually owned by such company which are taxable upon their capital stock under the laws of this state, shall be assessed at its actual value.
[Revisers' Note.-L. 1857, chap. 456, § 3; R. S., 8th ed., 1086, without change.]
See §§ 27 and 31, for manner of assessment.
See generally People ex rel. Bk. of Commonwealth v. Commrs. Taxes, 32 Barb. 509 (1860); People ex rel. Bk. of Comm, nwealth v. Commis. Taxes, 23 N. Y. 193 (1861); People ex rel. Bk. of Commerce v. Commrs. Taxes, 40 Barb. 334 (1863); People ex rel. Am. Linen Thread Co. v. Howland, 61 id. 273 (1871); People ex rel. Genesee Co. Bank v. Olmstead, 45 id. 644 (1866); People ex rel. Glens Falls Ins. Co. v. Ferguson, 38 N. Y. 89 (1868); North Shore Staten Island Ferry Co., Matter of, 63 Barb. 571 (1872); People ex rel. Otsego Bk. v. Supervisors, 51 N. Y. 404 (1873); People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commrs. Taxes, 1 Hun, 145 (1874); S. C., 47 How. Pr. 170 (1874); People ex rel. Williams v. Assessors, 2 Hun, 588 (1874); People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commrs. Taxes, 58 N. Y. 242 (1874); People ex rel. Trowbridge v. Commrs. Taxes, 4 Hun, 597 (1875); affirmed, 62 N. Y. 630; People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commrs. Taxes, 5 Hun, 200 (1875); People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commrs. Taxes, 64 N. Y. 541 (1876); People ex rel. W. Gas-Light Co. v. Board of Assessors, 16 Hun, 197 (1878); People ex rel. Manhattan Fire Ins. Co. v. Commrs., 76 N. Y. 64 (1879).
A railroad corporation is not liable to taxation upon its capital as personal estate, for that part thereof which is invested in the lands over which it runs, and in the railways and other fixtures connected therewith; but that part of the corporate property is to be taxed in the several towns and wards in which the same is situated, as real estate, and at its actual value at the time of the assessment. Mohawk & Hudson R. R. Co. v. Clute, 4 Paige, 384 (1834).
And it seems it is liable to be so taxed on its real estate, though it is not in receipt of any profits or income (per Bronson, J.). People ex rel. McMaster v. Supervisors of Niagara, 4 Hill, 20 (1842).
The capital stock of a railroad corporation which is not invested in its railways, or other real estate, is to be taxed as personal property, in the town or ward where the principal office or place for transacting the financial concerns of the company is situated. Mohawk & Hudson R. R. Co. v. Clute, 4 Paige, 384 (1834).
In Bank of Utica v. City of Utica, 4 Paige, 399, decided in 1834, Chancellor Walworth held, that under the provisions of the General Tax Law, 1 R. S., pt. 1, chap. 13, a corporation liable to taxation upon its capital could be taxed for only so much of the capital stock paid in or secured as will remain after deducting therefrom the actual cost of all the real estate of the corporation, but could not be taxed upon its surplus fund over the capital stock remaining undistributed.
No deduction is to be made for losses of capital. Trust Co. v. Mayor, etc., of New York, 7 Hill, 261 (1843).
No respect is to be paid either to the accumulations or losses of capital, in the course of the business of the company, but the amount paid and secured to be paid as capital is taken as the true sum to be inserted in the assessment-roll. The word "income " means that which is received from any business or investment of capital without reference to outgoing expenditures (per Bronson, J.). Id.
The word "profits" generally means the gain which is made upon any business or investment when both receipts and expenditures are taken into account (per Bronson, J.). Id.
Under the ninth section of the fourth title of the article of the Revised Statutes relative to the assessment of taxes on incorporated companies, the real as well as the personal estate of a corporation is exempted from taxation, provided a satisfactory affidavit is presented to the supervisors showing that such company is not in receipt of any income or profit, either from its real or personal estate. Utica Cotton Mfg. Co. v. Supervisors of Oneida, 1 Barb. Ch. 432 (1846).
If such an affidavit is made and filed with the clerk of the board of supervisors, it is the duty of the board to strike the name of the corporation from its assessment-roll. The estate of a corporation which is taxable as personalty is only that portion of its capital which is not invested in real estate, though the capital of a corporation embraces the
Farmers' Loan &
whole of its stock paid in or secured to be paid, whether invested in real or personal property. Utica Cotton Mfg. Co. v. Supervisors of Oneida, 1 Barb. Ch. 432 (1846).
Under Laws 1857, chap. 456, § 3, the capital stock is to be assessed at its actual value irrespective of the nominal par value. Oswego Starch Factory v. Dolloway, 21 N. Y. 449 (1860).
The privilege of commuting is allowed only to corporations which have been in existence a full year before the assessment is made. A bank organized only three months, held, liable to be taxed on the full amount of its capital, though its clear income was less than 5 per cent. Park Bank v. Wood, 24 N. Y. 93 (1861).
Where it appeared that the capital stock of a corporation was $10,000; its annual income, $7,000; annual expenses, $2,000 to $5,000, held, that an assessment upon $4,000 surplus was proper. People ex rel. Oswego Canal Co. v. City of Oswego, 6 Thomp. & C. 673 (1875).
A corporation owning and renting water-power in one district, held properly assessed in another district where its treasurer's office was. People ex rel. Oswego Canal Co. v. City of Oswego, 6 Thomp. & C. 673 (1875).
The commissioners of taxes may, in the absence of sworn testimony, ascertain the value of the capital stock of a corporation from other sources as they do in valuing real estate. People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commissioners of Taxes, 46 How. Pr. 315; 1 Thomp. & C. 611 (1873).
In estimating the value of the capital stock of a corporation its indebtedness is to be considered, but the valuation having been fixed, only the value of the real estate, and not the amount of indebtedness, is to be deducted therefrom. People ex rel. Broadway & C. R. R. Co. v. Commissioners of Taxes, 1 Thomp. & C. 635 (1873).
The actual value of the capital stock of a street railway company, less the real estate owned by it, is the proper basis. Id.
The rule of taxation as to corporations, when based upon the amount of capital paid in, is, after deducting the amount paid out for real estate from the capital, to assess the remaining capital at its actual value, leaving the real estate to be assessed like that of individuals in the town or ward where it is situated. People ex rel. Citizens' Gas-Light Co. v. Assessors of Brooklyn, 39 N. Y. 81 (1868); People ex rel. Am. Linen Thread Co. v. Assessors of Mechanicville, 6 Lans. 105 (1871).
The indebtedness of a corporation is to be considered in estimating the value of its capital stock. People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commissioners of Taxes, 46 How. Pr. 315; 1 Thomp. & C. 611 (1873).
Upon an application for a reduction on personal property as being without the State, the value of the property must be distinctly shown. The amount of payments on account of it held, not sufficient. People ex rel. Pacific Mail S. S. Co. v. Commissioners of Taxes, 64 N. Y. 541 (1876); affirming 5 Hun, 200.
An application was made to the assessors on behalf of a corporation to have its assessment stricken out upon affidavit showing that its debts exceeded the value of its personal property. As it did not appear that the capital stock, uninvested in real estate, did not exceed the sum assessed against it held, that there was no error in the refusal of the assessors to strike out the assessment. People ex rel. Utica & Black River R. R. Co. v. Shields, 6 Hun, 556 (1876).
An accumulation of surplus profits of a gas-light company, invested in mains and upon which certificates bearing interest had been issued to its stockholders, redeemable in money or in stock held, liable to taxation as the property of the company. Held, also, that the issue of such certificates did not create an indebtedness to be deducted, since the company had the option to exchange stock for them. People ex rel. Williamsburgh Gas-Light Co. v. Assessors of Brooklyn, 76 N. Y. 202 (1879).
Where a lot of land, held under lease for a term of years which provided that the lessor should purchase the buildings to be erected thereon or extend the lease, and the buildings thereon were assessed to the lessee, a bank, at a certain sum, and were valued together held, that this sum could not be taken as the amount to be deducted from the capital of the bank, since the building only, and not the interest in the land, was real estate of the bank. The assessed value only of the real estate of a corporation should be deducted from its capital, but not necessarily the cost of it. The deduction cannot be greater than the cost, because no more than that amount was invested, but it may be less. People ex rel. Van Nest v. Commissioners of Taxes, 80 N. Y. 573 (1880).
The refusal of commissioners, in taxing the capital of the bank, to deduct anything for the building erected by it upon land leased to it held, error, since the bank's property in the building was taxable as real estate.
It seems that to entitle a corporation to the deduction of the value of its real estate from that of its capital the real estate must have been paid for out of its capital. Id.
In assessing the capital of a corporation under Laws 1857, chap. 456, 3, the actual value of the stock is the basis, and where it is of no value, because of its indebtedness exceeding its assets, it should not be assessed. People ex rel. West Side & Yonkers R. Co. v. Commissioners of Taxes, 31 Hun, 32 (1st Dept., 1883).
The capital stock of a corporation is properly assessed at its actual and not its par value. People ex rel. Panama R. R. Co. v. Commissioners of Taxes, 64 How. Pr. 405 (1883).
The provisions of 1 R. S. 415, § 6, as amended by Laws 1853, chap. 654, are to be regarded as amended by Laws 1857, chap. 456, so far as is necessary to make them conform to the later statute. It could not have been intended by the provisions of Laws 1857, chap. 456, § 3, that the value of the surplus should be assessed in addition to the value of the