[In The A. B. C. of Taxation (New York, Doubleday, Page and Co., 1909), C. B. Fillebrown, president of the Massachusetts Single Tax League, has estimated the ground rent of Boston, and has given a number of examples of changes in the valuation of real estate. By the kind permission of the author the following extracts are here given without the accompanying argument in favor of the single tax, of which Mr. Fillebrown is a zealous, but fair-minded, advocate.]

A calculation of Boston's ground rent [page 16]. In a systematic attempt ... to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt about how much gross ground rent there is in the city of Boston, actual sales for the year 1902 and actual rentals have been collected from official sources.

One hundred and twenty pieces of real estate in various sections of the city are shown to have been sold at prices averaging one-fifth higher than their assessed valuation, indicating that at least in these one hundred and twenty cases the valuations were less than five-sixths of the selling price.

Landlords and real estate men are the best judges of the following calculation which, taking into account the fact that the prices given in these tables are those indicated by the revenue stamps on deeds, assumes that the buildings sold for one-third more than their assessed valuation:

Deducting from the total of prices indicated by the footing of the 120 sales...................................... $7,291,375

Four-thirds of assessed valuation of buildings............. 2,772,933

Would give perhaps a fair estimate of what the land sold for 4,518,442 To this it is necessary to add the capitalized tax upon the land for the same year, 1900, $3,758,600 x $14.70 (the number of dollars tax per thousand) x 20 (the number of years' purchase)...................................... 1,105,028

In order to get the gross capitalized ground rental value of the land............................................. 5,623,470

Of which the assessed valuations were only two-thirds.

Seven hundred and fifty-one rentals of estates, together with their assessed valuations, averaging $47,680 each, were also obtained from reliable sources. In the total for these it is found that the net rent is 5 per cent. (4.8), and the gross rent - net rent plus taxes - is 6 per cent, of the assessed valuation. That is to say, the net value, based upon net income to the owner, corresponds with the assessed valuation, and is five-sixths of the gross value, based upon what the user pays for the land. It is probable that these estates are in the aggregate improved to less than one-half of their normal efficiency, and hence the income which they now yield is less than 5 per cent of the price that they would actually sell for. . In the absence of contradictory or correcting testimony, it is fair to ask the reader to accept these lists of 120 sales and 751 estate rentals respectively as an indication of the ratio existing between assessed valuation and selling value.

Based upon the foregoing ratio, the following conservative estimate of the gross land value of Boston is submitted for scrutiny and criticism:

If the assessed valuation of Boston's land for 1907, which is in round numbers............................... $ 653,000,000

Is five-sixths of its selling value, then the addition of one-fifth ......................................... 130,600,000

Would give us as the net selling value................ 783,600,000

Adding to this the capitalized value of the amount of tax now on the land, $15.90 per thousand on $653,-000,000, or $10,382,000 at twenty years' purchase___ 207,600,000

Would give us as the true capitalized ground rental value 991,200,000 Add moderate estimate for franchises, say............. 108,800,000

And we should have a total capitalized ground-rental value of at least.................................. 1,100,000,000

At 5 per cent, this would indicate for Boston a ground rent of...........................................         55,000,000 or considerably more than double the total taxes of Boston. . . .

An object lesson in land values [page 56]. In this and the following object lessons the valuations, unless otherwise noted, are those of 1907. The total valuations on both sides of Winter Street, including the estates on the Tremont and Washington Street corners, were :

Land.

Showing for nine years an increase of 58 per cent in land, and a decrease of 11 per cent in buildings.

The assessed valuation of the estate at the southwest corner of Winter and Washington Street was in 1907 $557,000 of which $19,400 was for buildings. The land alone, 1,955 square feet, increased from $342,000, $175 per square foot, in 1898, to $537,600, $275 per square foot, in 1907. This assessed valuation of $275 per square foot for land is the highest in Boston. In 1893 the estate had been sold for $350,000. The present building was erected in 1881, but it is no distinct improvement, in height or otherwise, over its predecessor. . . .

In 1907 the estate was paying the owner an income of about $25,000. The Transit Commission took this estate by eminent domain, and settled for it in 1908 for $630,000 or $320 per square foot for the land and buildings. After appropriating subway station accommodations, it leased the balance of the estate for the sum of $28,000 a year and taxes, or $36,000 as long as no taxes are assessed. This is a return of about 4 1/2 per cent net on the purchase price of $630,000, on which sum the city is paying - as the money was borrowed - about 4 per cent. . . .

[Page 59.] The land in Winter Street, which was assessed at less than $4 per square foot in 1850, was assessed in 1907 at $130 per square foot. During the fifty-seven years intervening, the income, above taxes, from the land, in rent and appreciation has amounted to an average of 150 per cent annually on the investment of 1850. . . .

Ratio of buildings to land [page 62]. Massachusetts has fourteen counties. In every one of thirteen of these counties the assessed value of the buildings exceeds and in most cases largely exceeds the assessed value of the land. In the one other county, Suffolk (Boston, Chelsea, Revere, and Winthrop), containing 49 per cent of the whole land value of the state, the buildings fall far below the land in value.

Again, eighty-eight towns (out of Massachusetts' 354 cities and towns), having lowest valuations, show average assessments as follows: Of buildings, $130,000; of land, $145,000. . . . The following figures show Winter Street in company with the three smallest towns:

For the county of Suffolk, which contains the city of Boston, as well as for the State, no such discrepancy appears. Following are the figures :

In the twelve following large cities and towns the value of the buildings greatly exceeds that of the land.