
    MEMBERSHIP IN A BUSINESS EXCHANGE NOT TAXABLE.
    Common Pleas Court of Hamilton County.
    John M. Anderson v. Peter W. Durr, as Auditor, et al.
    Decided, April 28, 1918.
    
      Taxation — Enjoyment of a Privilege Not Property — Membership in the New Stoclc Exchange Not Taxable in Ohio.
    
    Membership in the New York Stock Exchange does not constitute property within the meaning of the law of Ohio relating to taxation, but is a mere personal privilege, and is not taxable even though the owner of such a membership is a resident of Ohio.
    
      Murray Seasongood, for plaintiff.
    
      Walter M. Loche, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, contra.
    It was alleged by the plaintiff and admitted by the defendants that the defendant county auditor was about tó evalúe the membership of the plaintiff in the New York Stock Exchange, place the same on the tax duplicate and assess a tax thereon. Plaintiff claimed that such membership is not taxable property or investment under the laws of Ohio; but that if it were taxable, its situs is not in Ohio, even though the owner’s residence is in this state.
    Before this case was decided Hon, Smith Hickenlooper, then counsel for defendants, in a letter addressed to the court, conceded that under the peculiar wording of General Code, 5376, as to the seventh item of the tax return, it is not broad enough to include intangible or incorporeal personal property, following Chisholm v. Shields, 67 O. S'., 374, 378, as to the meaning of the word “otherwise,” and, also, opinion of Judge Kunkle in Whitely v. Arbogast, Treasurer, 6 N.P.(N.S.), 313 (affirmed by the 'Supreme Court without report). However, it was contended in said letter that if such membership were taxable property, it could be taxed in the county of the owner’s residence.
   Caldwell, J.

The court finds that the plaintiff has, in this county, a letter notifying him he has been elected a member of the New York Stock Exchange. This gives him the privilege of transacting business during certain hours and under certain conditions in a building in New York City and nowhere else.

This mere personal privilege is not, in the opinion of the court, property within the tax laws of Ohio.

Therefore the prayer of the plaintiff will be granted and the temporary injunction heretofore issued will be made pereptual.  