In re Sioux City Stockyards Co.

• Decision Date: 25 October 1910
• Parties: IN RE SIOUX CITY STOCKYARDS CO.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

149 Iowa 5

127 N.W. 1102

IN RE SIOUX CITY STOCKYARDS CO.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 25, 1910.

Appeal from District Court, Woodbury County; J. F. Oliver, Judge.

An application was made to the board of review for the assessment of taxes in Sioux City to have the assessment of the Sioux City Stockyards Company made upon its shares of stock as a corporation and not, as the assessor had reported his assessment, upon its property as a merchant. This application, made by a taxpayer of the county and members of the board of supervisors, was ignored by the board of review, and the assessment reported by the assessor was confirmed. Thereupon the applicants took an appeal to the district court of Woodbury county in the method provided in Code, § 1373, as amended by chapter 60, Acts 32d Gen. Assem. The stockyards company, by its president and certain stockholders therein, appeared in the district court, and moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the shares of stock were not assessable otherwise than as they had been assessed by the assessor; that the action of the assessor and board of review was final, and could not be inquired into on appeal to the district court; and that the statute on which such appeal was based was unconstitutional. This motion was sustained, and from the court's action in dismissing the appeal the applicants have prosecuted their appeal to this court. Reversed.McCoy & McCoy, Ben McCoy, and Struble & Struble, for appellants.

Milchrist & Scott, for appellees.

McCLAIN, J.

The assessment which the assessor made against the stockyards company was under Code, § 1318, which provides that any person, firm, or corporation owning or having in possession or under control in the state with authority to sell the same any personal property purchased with a view of its being sold shall be held to be a merchant and assessed at the average value of the stock during the year, and that such taxation of a corporation coming within this description shall be in lieu of any tax on the corporate shares. The contention of these appellants in their complaint to the board of review was that the corporation should have been assessed under Code, § 1323, which provides that shares of stock of any corporation organized under the law of this state, except corporations otherwise provided for, shall be assessed to the owners thereof at the place where its principal business is transacted, the assessment to be on the value of such shares on the 1st day of January in each year. It is further provided, in sections 1324 and 1325, that the assessment of shares shall be on the basis of their value as found by the assessor, excluding in arriving at such value the real estate of the corporation situated within the state, and that the corporation shall be liable for the payment of the taxes assessed to the stockholders, such taxes being collectible from the corporation in the same manner and under the same penalties as in case of the taxes due from an individual taxpayer, the corporation being authorized to recover from each stockholder his proportion of the taxes so paid, and to have a lien on his stock and unpaid dividends therefor. We are not called upon to decide whether the corporation was properly taxed under Code, § 1318, or should have been taxed under Code, § 1323, providing for the assessment of its property to its shareholders. The sole question presented is whether the trial court erred in refusing to entertain an appeal from the action of the board of review in refusing to make an assessment on the stock which it is conceded would have resulted in the payment of a larger tax by the corporation on behalf of its stockholders than was payable by the corporation as assessed under the provisions relating to merchants.

1. The first contention of appellee in support of its motion to dismiss the appeal from the board of review which was sustained by the lower court is that the statute relating to appeals does not authorize a new assessment on such appeal, and that to tax the shareholders, instead of the corporation, is practically to make a new assessment. Under Code, § 1373, it is provided that an appeal from the board of review to the district court may be taken by any person aggrieved by the action of the assessor in assessing his property, and that on such appeal the court shall determine anew all questions arising before the board relating to the liability of the property to assessment or the amount thereof. Under this provision, it has been held in numerous cases which need not here be cited that the court has no authority to increase the assessment, but can only confirm, reduce, or annul it with direction to the county auditor to correct the assessment book accordingly, if any correction is found necessary. With this construction of the statute in view, the Legislature in 1907 (Acts 32d Gen. Assem. c. 60, § 1) amended the section of the Code last above referred to by adding the following provisions: “Any officer of a county, city, town, township or district interested or a taxpayer thereof can in like manner, make complaint before said board of review in respect to the assessment of any property in the township, city, or town, and an appeal from the action of the board of review in fixing the amount of the assessment on any property concerning which complaint is made, can be taken by any of such aforementioned officers. Such appeal is in addition to the appeal allowed to the person whose property is assessed and shall be taken in the name of the county, city, town, township or district interested and tried in the same manner, except that the notice of appeal shall be also served upon the owner of the property concerning which complaint is made and affected thereby or person required to return said property for assessment. Upon trial of any appeal from the action of the board of review...