Amoskeag Savings Bank v. Purdy

Citations

• 231 U.S. 373
• 34 S. Ct. 114
• 58 L. Ed. 274
• 1913 U.S. LEXIS 2575

Syllabus

<p>Tbe provisions in tbe tax law of New York, chap. 62, Laws of 1909, imposing a flat rate on shares of all banks, both state and national, without the right of exemption in case of indebtedness of the owners, does not discriminate against national banks and is not invalid under § 5219, Rev. Stat. People v. Weaver, 100 IT. S. 539, distinguished.</p> <p>Mercantile Bank v. New York, 121 U. S. 138, followed as to what con- ■ stitutes moneyed capital within the meaning of § 5219, Rev. Stat.</p> <p>The State is not obliged to apply the same system to the taxation of national banks that it uses in the taxation of other property, provided no injustice, inequality or unfriendly discrimination is inflicted upon them. Bridgeport Savings Bank. v. Feitner, 191 N. Y. 88, approved.</p> <p>The Federal courts will not overthrow a system of state taxation as discriminatory against national banks under § 5219, Rev. Stat., unless such discrimination is affirmatively shown.</p> <p>Section 5219, Rev. Stat., deals with shareholders of national banks as a class and not as individuals, and a scheme of taxation that is fair to the class will not be held invalid because of a particular case arising from circumstances personal to the individual affected.</p>