State ex rel. Taylor v. Guilbert
| Citation | 70 Ohio St. 229,71 N.E. 636 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. TAYLOR, Pros. Atty., v. GUILBERT, State Auditor. |
| Decision Date | 07 June 1904 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
70 Ohio St. 229
71 N.E. 636
STATE ex rel. TAYLOR, Pros. Atty.,
v.
GUILBERT, State Auditor.
Supreme Court of Ohio.
June 7, 1904.
Quo warranto by the state, on the relation of Edward L. Taylor, Jr., prosecuting attorney, against Guilbert, Auditor of State. Petition dismissed.
By his petition the relator gives the court to be informed that by the act of the General Assembly passed April 25, 1904, entitled ‘An act to impose a tax upon the right to succeed to or inherit property,’ it is made the duty of the Auditor of State, defendant herein, to proceed immediately to cause to be prepared blank books and forms upon which to make the necessary returns and reports to carry into effect and operation the provisions of such act, and to provide for the charging and collection of the tax as therein provided, which duty defendant is about to perform, and thereby to expend public moneys of the state. Relator says the act is null and void; that the exercise of the duties required, and the exercise of the powers, privileges, and franchises sought to be conferred thereby, are all in contravention of the Constitution of Ohio and to the fourteenth amendment to the federal Constitution. Wherefore relator prays that the defendant may be compelled to answer by what warrant or authority he claims to exercise the powers, privileges, and franchises about to be exercised by him, and that he be ousted and altogether excluded therefrom. To this petition a general demurrer was interposed by the defendant, and the cause was heard and submitted on that demurrer.
Price and Davis, JJ., dissenting.
1. The power to impose taxes is a legislative power, and is vested in the General Assembly by section 1 of article 2 of the Constitution.
2. Section 2 of article 12 is a limitation upon the taxing power, so far as the same applies to taxation of property, both as to the method of taxation, and the character and amount of property which may be lawfully exempted from taxation, and furnishes the governing principle for all laws authorizing taxes for general revenue on property. But this section has no application to taxes known as ‘excise taxes.’
3. The act of April 25, 1904, entitled ‘An act to impose a tax upon the right to succeed or inherit property,’ being a tax not upon property, but upon the right to inherit or succeed to property, the power to enact the same is not affected by the limitations of section 2 of article 12 of the Constitution.
4. An excise tax which operates uniformly throughout the state, and bears equally upon all persons standing in the same category, does not deprive any of the equal protection of the laws.
5. The act of April 25, 1904, imposing a tax upon the right to succeed to or inherit property, is not in conflict with the Constitution or Bill of Rights because of the exemption therein contained, and is a valid law.
[Ohio St. 230]Edward L. Taylor, Jr., Pros. Atty., and Augustus N. Seymour, for relator.
[Ohio St. 247]SPEAR, C. J. (after stating the facts).
Section 1 of the act contains the provisions which are assailed as beyond the power of the General Assembly to enact. It is there provided that ‘the right to succeed to or inherit property within the jurisdiction of this state, and any interest therein, whether belonging to inhabitants of this state or not, and whether tangible or intangible, including annuities, which shall pass by will or by the inheritance laws of this state, or by deed, grant, sale or gift made or intended to take effect in possession or enjoyment after the death of the grantor, to the use of the father, mother, husband, wife, brother, sister, niece, nephew, lineal descendant, adopted child, or person recognized as an adopted child and made a legal heir under the provisions of section 4182 of the Revised Statutes of Ohio, or the lineal descendant thereof, the lineal descendant of any adopted child, the wife or widow of a son, the husband of a daughter of a decedent, or to any one in trust for such person or persons, shall be taxed as follows, to wit: Upon the value of the property exceeding three thousand dollars, succeeded to or inherited by any person, two per centum on such excess; such tax to be borne by the person so succeeding to or inheriting the same in the manner herein provided. And all administrators, executors and trustees, shall be liable for all such taxes, with interest, as hereinafter provided, until [Ohio St. 248]the same shall have been fully paid. Such taxes shall become due and payable immediately upon the death of the decedent, and shall at once become a lien upon said property.’
In brief, the objection to the act is that if there be power in the General Assembly to impose a tax on inheritances, or if this inquiry is foreclosed by previous decisions of the court, still the attempt to impose a tax upon the right to succeed to or inherit property to the extent of two per cent. upon the value of such property in excess of three thousand dollars so succeeded to or inherited by any one person is the placing of an unequal burden upon those who inherit or succeed in excess of three thousand dollars, and is therefore in violation of section 2, art. 12, of the Constitution, which requires uniformity and equality in the imposition of the burdens of taxation.
We are relieved of any extended inquiry with respect to the question of the power of the General Assembly to impose an inheritance
[71 N.E. 637
tax. It was held in State ex rel. v. Ferris, 53 Ohio St. 314, 41 N. E. 579,30 L. R. A. 218, that a tax on inheritances is an excise tax-that is, it is a tax on the right to receive property, as distinct from a tax on the property itself-and this right to tax is within the power of the General Assembly, which body may regulate...
To continue reading
Request your trial