Delaware State journal and statesman., 1866-01-19
THE DEsTR UoTIyE ExAoTIONs OF
THE REVENUE TAX ON DRESS
MAKERS.


The late determination of the Revenue
officers to enforce the unjust exaction of the
tax-law on dress makers as it now stands
has occasioned widespread CONSERVATION
among them. The majority see before them
an absolute closing up of their only business,
while the few who enjoy successful dress
making in connection with some other
branch of business-such as millinery or
fancy goods, etc. i'm which their capital is
invested, have the prospect of being sold out
to pay the tax on their dress-making.
The section of the Revenue Law requiring
six per cent. on the gross value of the arti-
cles is absolutely destructive to the whole
dress making business. The law stands
thus =" On ready-made clothing, boots,
shoes, gloves, mittens and moccasins, caps,
hats and bonnets, or other articles of dress
not otherwise assessed and taxed as such,
for the wear of men, women or children, five
per cent. ad valorem." A further amend
ment declares: "Dress-makers making arti-
Giles TO order, as custom work, and not for
sale generally, shall, to the amount of 81 900
be exempt from duty and for amy excess be-
yond 81 900, six per cent"
Now, OF oil the manufactures mentioned
-tailors, shoemakers, milliners, furniture
Makers ETC., etc. the only one which pro-
vides no materials, and therefore derives no
profit from the goods used, is dress making.
There appears to have been misapprehen-
sion on the part of our Legislators in regard
TO this matter-and reasonably enough as
there was no representation of the dress
making interest in Congress, as in the case
Of other trades. They class tailors, milli-
ncrs, ETC., and dress-makers together, and
say all should be taxed at the same rate
The tailors and milliners keep stock of
materials and trimmings on hand, which
are bought at WhoIesate prices. They have
their profits on the goods as well as on the
making, amounting from thirty to fifty per
cent. on the whole. But, with dress makers,
not one in hundred, ever provides the ma
terial for dress for customer; and, even
in the rare instances in which she does So she
has 10 purchase the dress at retail price, the
customer merely reimbursing her for the
actual cost of the article. Frequently the
dress maker finds Innings, sometimes the
trimmings; but often rich laces, such as
Point, Chantilly, Guipure, ETC., etc, are re-
trimmed on dresses over and over again,
and yet, as the law stands, the dressmaker
is called upon to pay tax on the full value
of the lace every time il is thus used and in
no other business is there so great a dispro.
portion between the cost OF materials and
the price received for making them up. We
will give an example: A lady brings rich
moire-antique TO her dressmaker, costing,
for the silk alone, $120; the point lace which
she brings to trim it, the value of which is
5000 Can ordinary sumD the dress-maker
charges her for making SIS, which the Gus,
toner thinks pretty heavy sum for making
dress on which there is no trimming bui
lace. There is about 81 more for Innings
buttons, sewing silk, ETC., making in ALL foi
goods and work, $342, the tax on which il
$40 So. 1t is plain that no business can con
tinue that has to pay $50 81 for the privilege
Of doing $l5 worth Of work. Nor can it be
supposed that any lady will be willing Il
pay her dress-maker $35 SO for simply ma
king her dress, so as to allow her to NEE
the tax, especially when ladies can avoid tn,
tax by having dress-making done at home
Thus the whole dress-making business is il
danger of being destroyed. Again, take al
ordinary black silk dress; the silk will cost say
, $50; trimmings, SlQ; Innings, ETC., SO; making
$5 the whole value, $71. The tax on thi
will be 81 30, leaving 64c. to defray the eK
penso Of the assistance and rent. In view
, of this unequal bearing of the law, the Reve
, nue. officers have from the first been reluctan
} to belieye that it was intended to make sncl
, extraordinary demands of a class Of person
, so generally unable to earn more than NEE
their expenses, and who in most instance
J are women depending entirely on dress
| making for the support of themselves AM
families, and who generally have no knowl
edge of any other business. This considera