My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes 04/15/1958
City-of-Martinsville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1958
>
Minutes 04/15/1958
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/1/2007 2:22:59 PM
Creation date
2/1/2007 11:59:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
4/15/1958
City Council - Category
Minutes
City Council - Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />The easiest and most automatic way in which to achieve this sort of tax <br />equality among Martinsville business and occupational licensees would be to <br />levy a tax directly upon value added by handling. This tax would be levied <br />at a single rate. Assuming that the city plans to keep its total revenue <br />from business and occupational license taxes at the 1954 level, the rate <br />would be 88~ per $100 of value added. This rate would apply equally to all <br />licensees. <br /> <br />Administrative objections to ~ tax directly ~ value~. The city <br />of Norfolk adopted such a tax in 194b;'""and abandoned it the following year. <br />Since value added by handling is arrived at by deducting cost of goods from <br />gross receipts, a tax levied directly upon value added by handling carries <br />with it many of the administrative problems inherent in the net income tax. <br />The argument made before this committee by the representative of the city's <br />laundries that one half of the laundries' pick-up and delivery expense <br />should be treated as cost of goods as analogous to "freight inn gives ample <br />illustration of the problem of administering a value added tax. Returns have <br />to be carefully audited and loopholes plugged as they develop. NorfoDc found <br />the task beyond its capacity and since the abandonment of the tax there, no <br />other Virginia city has cared to experiment with it. <br /> <br />The administrative compromise - the clas~ified gross receipts~. The <br />value added tax being too difficult of administration to make it desirable <br />as a local tax, an effort was made to design a gross receipts tax which <br />would approximate as closely as possible the principle of an equal tax per <br />dollar of value added by handling. Since different types of businesses <br />operate at different ratios of value added by handling to gross receipts, <br />the classified gross receipts tax must necessarily involve rate differentials. <br />If a retail merchant's cost of goods represents 70 per cent of his gross <br />receipts, leaving 30 per cent of gross receipts as value added by hancUing, <br />while a wholesaler's cost of goods equals 85 per cent of his gross receipts, <br />leaving a. value added by handling equal to 15 per cent of gross receipts, <br />the tax rate per $100 of gross receipts applied to wholesalers must be one <br />half that applied to retailers to result in an equal charge per $100 of <br />value added by handling. <br /> <br />The number of classifications. The Martinsville ordinance separates <br />local businesses-rnto nine major classes. These classes were determined <br />partially on the basis of major groupings in the classification of businesses <br />and occupations by the United States Bureau of the Census, but primarily the <br />study of value added data. Thus, businesses and occupations were originally <br />separated into retailers, wholesalers, professions, service enterprises, <br />amusements, and manufac turers. A study of the figures for service enterprises <br />shm{ed that the variation among sub-classes in terms of value added ratio <br />made it possible to break the major class into three separate groups. On the <br />other hand, though it was noted that some retail merchants operate at value <br />added ratios as low as the average for vrholesalers, or even lower, while <br />others shoTI ratios higher than some of the service enterprises, the retail <br />classification was not broken down. This again represented a compromise <br />with problems of administration. So many retail units sell such a variety of <br />goods (department stores and drug stores, for example) that a classified <br />merchants ta~ would be more difficult to administer than the value added tax <br />itself. <br /> <br />(2 ) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.