페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

and said section 153 merely authorized the insertion in a mortgage of a particular kind of contract in certain counties, and, as the legal rate of interest is not required to be uniform, does not change the law regulating the assessments for taxation. Kase v. Bennett, 54 N. J. E. 97.

P. L. 1876, p. 160, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, is constitutional State, Vail v. Runyon, 41 N. J. L. 98; Merchants Insurance Co. v. Newark, 54 N. J. L. 148; Appleby v. East Brunswick, 44 N. J. L. 153.

P. L. 1882, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court because of its special character in not including in its operation all mortgages made to officers of courts, the interest or income of which is payable to a beneficiary. Shotwell v. Dalrymple, 49 N. J. L. 530.

Repeal of charter.—The provision in the charter of Trenton that real estate in said city shall be assessed for all purposes without any deduction for any indebtedness whatever is a local and special law inconsistent with the general tax law, and was abrogated by paragraph 12 of the amended constitution. Howell v. Richards, 47 N. J. L. 434.

Loan association mortgage.-Under P. L. 1903, p. 394, § 10, as amended by P. L. 1904, p. 238, superseded although included in section 402, ante, of the present act, a mortgage held by a building and loan association cannot be deducted from the assessed value of the real estate. Hartshorne v. Avon-by-theSea, 75 N. J. L. 407.

Persons liable to tax on mortgage.-A mortgagee may pay the tax on land, and add the amount to his mortgage. The Stonington Savings Bank v. Davis, 14 N. J. E. 286; Elmer v. Loper, 25 N. J. E. 475; Dolman v. Cook, 14 N. J. E. 56.

A mortgagee is bound to pay the tax on his mortgage, and cannot recover it of the mortgagor. Pond v. Causdell, 23 N. J. E. 181.

A mortgagee in possession must pay the tax on the land. Shields v. Lozear, 22 N. J. E. 447, 453.

Under P. L. 1876, p. 160, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, if deduction be claimed by landowner and allowed by the assessor, the tax upon the whole amount of the mortgage debt should be assessed against the holder of the mortgage. Appleby v. East Brunswick, 44 N. J. L. 153.

By virtue of an order of an Orphans' Court, an administrator sold land of his intestate free from the dower of the widow, and invested a specific part of the proceeds of sale in a mortgage made by him as administrator. The order directed him to pay the interest of the investment to the widow during her life. Held, that if the mortgagor claimed deduction, the mortgage was taxable to the administrator, who, upon payment of the tax, could deduct the same from the interest payable to the widow. Dilts v. Taylor, 57 N. J. L. 369.

Under P. L. 1876, p. 160, when a mortgage was assigned by the owner thereof to another, who held certain notes of the assignor, as collateral security for the payment of the notes, the mortgage was taxable as the personal property of the assignor, so long as the notes remained unpaid and the mortgage continued to be held as security for the payment. Lippincott's Adm'r v. Howell, 66 N. J. L. 508.

Where the owner of a farm, who was mortgagor, conveyed the same in fee simple to the mortgagee, and the owner of the mortgage, as mortgagee, discharged the bond and surrendered the mortgage for cancellation, in good faith, as the consideration of the conveyance, and the mortgage was cancelled and discharged of record, the mortgage is no longer a ratable of personal property for the purpose of taxation, and cannot be included by the assessor in the list of ratables of property belonging to the former owner thereof, although at the time of the assessment he remains the owner of the farm covered by the mortgage. State, Earles v. Ramsay, 61 N. J. L. 194.

Place of taxation.-A mortgage owned by a resident of this State, although made upon lands situate in another State, where a tax upon such lands has been assessed and paid within the preceding twelve months, is taxable here. Darcy v. Darcy, 51 N. J. L. 140.

See notes under par. 7, sec. 303, ante, for deductions for debt from both real and personal property.

Under P. L. 1876, p. 160, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, no claim for deduction from taxation on account of any debt secured by mortgage upon lands within the State can be allowed by any other than the assessor of the place wherein the lands are situate, and if such claim be made to and allowed by him, then, in lieu thereof, he is to assess the mortgage debt, and the tax so levied is to be collected by the collector in and for the same municipality. State, Cummins v. Jones, 40 N. J. L. 105; State, King v. Manning, 40 N. J. L. 461.

Under P. L. 1876, p. 160, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, the deduction of the mortgage debt from the valuation of the lands mortgaged may be allowed by the assessor, and the owner of the mortgage be assessed therefor without the deduction being claimed by the owner of the lands under oath. State, Vail v. Runyon, 41 N. J. L. 98.

The assessor may require an affidavit to satisfy himself of the existence and amount of the mortgage and of the person by whom the same is held; but, if the deduction is claimed, and is allowed, and the sum allowed is in fact the correct amount of the mortgage debt, and the owner of the mortgage is taxed only therefor, the latter cannot complain. State, Vail v. Runyon, 41 N. J. L. 98.

Under P. L. 1879, p. 228, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, a debtor who desires to claim a deduction from his tax, on the ground that the State holds a mortgage on his land, must make such claim to the assessor under oath. Conover V. Honce, 46 N. J. L. 347.

Under P. L. 1893, p. 494, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, the receiver claimed of the assessor of taxes deduction for mortgages, which it is admitted existed upon the property of the company on the 20th day of May, 1897, the day to which the assessment related. The assessor did not question the existence or validity of the mortgages or demand a claim in writing or under oath, but refused to allow the deduction. Held, that the assessor should have allowed the deduction and that the prosecutor was entitled to have it made under the direction of the court. Rosell v. Buck, 62 N. J. L. 575.

Examination of owner of real estate.

15. Sec. 403. Every owner of real property of the taxing district shall, on application of the assessor, render a full and true account of his name and real property and produce his title papers, and he may be examined on oath by the assessor, in substantially the same form hereinbefore prescribed in the case of personal property, and if he shall refuse so to do, or to testify on oath when required, or shall render a false or fraudulent account, the assessor shall estimate his property at the highest value he has reason to suppose it may be placed. (P. L. 1918, p. 862.)

Mandatory or directory.-With respect to the enumerated means or sources of information, by or from which the value of property is to be ascertained by the assessor, the tax act of 1846, section 1, is not mandatory, but merely directory. State, Keeler v. Tindall, 36 N. J. L. 97.

Duties of assessor.–The essential thing to be done by the assessor under the tax act of 1846, section 1, is to ascertain to the best of his ability and according to his own judgment, the names of the persons taxable, and the actual value of all taxable property; and this he is to do by diligent inquiry, by the oaths or affirmations of the persons to be assessed, and by personal examination of the property to be valued. State, Keeler v. Tindall, 36 N. J. L. 97.

Under the tax act of 1846, section 1, an assessor has a right to revise his opinions as to value, deductions and other matters involved in the assessment until his determination as to the amount of tax to be levied against the individual is officially entered in his tax-book. State, Davison v. Silvers, 41 N. J. L. 505.

Demand for account.—Under the tax act of 1846, section 1, the assessor's demand of an account of taxable property may be made at a place other than the owner's dwelling-house, if he do not refuse, on that ground, to render an account. State v. Thomas et al., 17 N. J. L. 160.

Estimate by assessor.—The prosecutor, being called on by the assessor of his ward, and furnished with a blank to be filled up with the particulars of his property, under oath, told the assessor that he would see his attorney, and if it was right, etc., he would fill up the blank and return it to the assessor's office. Held, that the assessor, hearing nothing further from the prosecutor, was justified, by the provisions of the eighth section of the tax law of 1866, in assessing his property at its highest estimated value. State, Young v. Parker, 34 N. J. L. 49.

Under P. L. 1866, p. 1078, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, unless the taxpayer refuses to be sworn, the assessor cannot fix the highest valuation he has reason to believe is right. Building Association v. Nunn, 44 N. J. L. 354, affirmed 46 N. J. L. 205.

Certiorari.--Under the act of 1862, the person taxed was bound, if required, to state to the assessor the particulars of his. property under oath or affirmation, and if he declines to do so, he is not entitled to appeal or to relief by certiorari. State, Sharp v. Apgar, 31 N. J. L. 358.

But it was held that such refusal only deprived the party of his right to appeal, and that his remedy by certiorari was unaffected. State, Bridge Co. v. Metz, 32 N. J. L. 199, 203; State v. Bentley, 23 N. J. L. 532; State, International Assurance Co. v. Haight, 35 N. J. L. 279, 284.

Oath of taxpayer.-Under the eighth section of P. L. 1866, p. 1078, supplemental to the tax act of 1846, it is not necessary, in order to make a valid assessment, that the assessor shall examine persons to be assessed, by oath or affirmation. State, Keeler v. Tindall, 36 N. J. L. 97; State, Paulison v. Taylor, 35 N. J. L. 184.

Sufficiency of affidavit.—Under the tax act of 1846, § 1, an affidavit setting forth that the deponent has no property in the ward subject to taxation, is sufficient and conclusive, unless the contrary is shown by other evidence. State v. McClurg, 27 N. J. L. 253; State v. Randolph Township, 25 N. J. L. 427.

Alteration of duplicate.-Under the tax act of 1846, § 1, an assessment for taxes in a school district made upon real estate only is illegal, and the assessor has no authority to alter the duplicate by extending the assessment to the personal estate of those assessed, and adding the names of others not assessed, after the duplicate has been delivered to the collector. State, Roll v. Perrine, 34 N. J. L. 254.

Note on act of 1918.-It will be observed that, under this section of the act of 1918, “every owner of real property” is obliged, on application by the assessor, to render an account of his name and property while, under the general tax act of 1903, that duty was placed upon “every inhabitant of the taxing district."

ARTICLE V.

COMPLETION AND REVIEW OF ASSESSMENTS.

Period for assessing.

Assessor's duplicate.

Affidavit by assessor.

16. Sec. 501. The assessor shall begin the work of making assessments upon real and personal property upon the first day of October in each year and shall complete the same by the tenth day of January following, on which date he shall attend before the county board of taxation and file with said board his complete assessment list, and a true copy thereof, to be called the assessor's duplicate, properly made up and legibly written in ink, to be by said board examined, revised and corrected as hereinafter provided. The assessor sliall annex to his assessment list and duplicate so filed his affidavit in substantially the following form: “I........ ........, assessor of the................of............ do swear (or affirm) that the foregoing list contains the valuations made by me, to the best of my ability of all the property liable to taxation in the taxing district in which I am the assessor, and that I have valued the same, without l'avor or partiality, at its full and fair value, at such price, as in my judgment it would sell for at a fair and bona fide sale by private contract on the first day of October last, and have made such deduction only for debts and exemptions as are prescribed by law.” Every assessor who shall fail to file his assessment list and duplicate with the county board of taxation at the time herein prescribed or within such further time as the board may allow, shall be subject to a penalty of ten dollars for such failure, and to an additional penalty of ten dollars for each additional day he shall fail to file the same, said penalties to be collected by a civil suit against such assessor at the instance of the county board of taxation, in any court of competent jurisdiction, the amount of such penalties when collected to be paid into the treasury of the county. In case of the failure of any assessor to file his assessment list and duplicate as aforesaid the county board of taxation may summarily remove such assessor from office, and itself make or cause to be made and filed the said assessment list and duplicate. (P. L. 1918, p. 862.)

Penalty for

failure to file returns.

Renoval of assessor.

« 이전계속 »