upr000155 4

The foregoing provision requires the Commission to prepare and adopt formulas providing the method or methods pursued in fixing and establishing the full cash value of all franchises and property assessed by it, and permits it to change such formulas from time to time, but requires such formulas to, in any event, show all the elements of value considered by the Commission in arriving at such valuations* In addition to valuing the franchises of a railroad company, if any, the Commission may value all physical property used directly in the operation of any such business of any such company in this state as a collective unit, and if such company operates in more than one county, such unit valuation for the collective property shall be apportioned to the several counties upon a mile-unit valuation basis, and shall thereafter be assessed in each county according to the mile-unit valuation so established by the Commission* Therefore, with respect to the specific propositions posed in your letter, the answer necessarily hinges upon a determination whether the information requested could reasonably be used as one of the elements of value con­sidered by the Commission* In this respect, it seems to me that valuations placed upon railroad property by other states, and taxes paid pursuant to such valuations in other states, should not be one of the elements of valuation considered by the Commission in valuing rail­road property in Nevada* As discussed with you on the telephone, there apparently is no uniform method of valuing property among all of the states, and each of the states presumably may consider different factors in arriving at valuations* Therefore, I d o n ’t believe such valuations should be included in the formula of the Tax Commission and considered as one of the elements of valuing property in Nevada^ There is no question as to the power of the Nevada Tax Commission to require information for its use in fixing the valuation of railroad property. It therefore seems to me that the railroad company should furnish sueh information as it may readily have available, even though it may question the pertinency of sueh information in valuation processes* Where the information is not avail­able and oannot be secured prior to the extended time of June 15, 1956, it, of oourse, cannot be furnished, and I think a statement to that effect should be given to the Tax Commission when the Inoompleted report is returned to the Commission* The principal oonsequenoes of falling