The case presented two legal questions. First. Is the company liable to a tax on its net earnings or income, nnder the second section of the act of April 30th, 1864 ? And, second. Must it be charged with interest on the balance due to the commonwealth, at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum, from thirty days after the date of the settlement by the accounting department until tire same is paid, as provided in the third section of the act of April 9th, 1867 ? The act of1864 clearly embraces this corporation in its general terms, ’unless it pays a tax on its dividends. This is conceded. But its counsel assumes that it does pay a tax on its dividends, under the act of 1844 and other laws of this commonwealth, whilst the State contends that it is exempt from all such taxes, and merely pays upon its capital stock, although measured by the amount of dividends. In order to properly understand and construe our tax laws, we are obliged to look into their origin and history, as many of the statutes, if standing isolated and alone, are obscurely worded and difficult of solution. A tax upon the dividends made by corporations of various kinds, has been common for a long time under our statutes. Certainly, as early as 1824, and probably as far back as 1814, a tax was imposed upon those made by the banks of the commonwealth. That has been
The law requires all the persons and corporations therein named, not paying a tax on dividends, to pay three per centum of their net earnings jnto the State treasury. This company, even if subject to a tax on its dividends, which is not shown, was exonerated therefrom by the act of 1859, already cited, and comes within the very letter and intention of the present law. For us to hold that all of the corporations taxed on their capital stock, to be computed according to the dividends, were paying a tax on dividends, would be to render entirely nugatory the act of 1864, as there is not a corporation in the State but what would be absolved from the tax on its net earnings. The law would be emasculated and but a dead letter. We are, therefore, clearly of the opinion that this company pays no tax on its dividends, but on its capital stock only, and must consequently pay the tax charged against it. in the settlement from which it has taken an appeal. Although we do not wish or desire the provisions of the act of April 9th, 1867 (P. L. p. 58), imposing interest at the rate of twelve per centum on diligent tax-payers, yet there is no misunderstanding the enactment. The object of the legislature was to compel punctuality, and for that purpose interest, at double the ordinary rates, is directed to be charged on all of those failing to pay as required by law. This, by the second section, is to be charged by the officers in the settlement, and on the balances found due the third section inflicts a like rate of interest, to be computed at the expiration of one month, instead of the charge of six per cent, after three months, as required by the act of 1811. Such a provision is within the law-making power, is clearly expressed, and must be carried into effect by the courts. You are, therefore, instructed to render a verdict in favor of the commonwealth for the tax of $1836.45, with interest thereon at the rate of twelve per centum per annum, after thirty days from the date of settlement.
Affirmed by the Supreme Court (9 P. F. Smith, 404).