Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-02-01
1ancaster frtelligs1lrer.
THURSDAY EVENING, FEB. l. 1898.
transitional Taxation.

InquisitOrial Taxation.
The committee of & The Pennsylvania
State Grange of Husbandry," which
proposes to change the tax laws, believes
" that uniform tax, equal upon every
kind of property, will be paid cheerfully
and promptly 1t is doubtless upon this
faith that the committee bases its conf
dence that taxpayers will report to tax
assessors all the property that they own
of every kind. We do not share the
committees belief that taxes will ever
be paid by every citizen cheerfully and
promptly, no matter how equitably they
are laid. We are firmly Of the opinion
that taxes laid upon invisible-nOt un-
salable, as the types made us say yester-
day-properiy can never be universally
collected. This has been well determined
often and never more satisfactorily than
in the collection of the United States in
come tax. Not could have been more
euuitable than that. 1t is in theory the
ideal tax. 1t is the one that should
be paid cheerfully and promptly if such
payment can be asked for any tax.
Noman can say that he cannot afford
to paw a tax on his income over thou
sand dollars, for there is the income to
confutc his statement. Nor can he say
that it is not a uniform tax, when all
incomes are equally taxed. 1t is not a
tax upon unproductive property but
unproductive property should hardly be
taxed. Some time it will become pro-
ductive, if it is valuable, and then it
will be taxable and while the owner
awaits an income from it the state can
await it's tax We know no more beau
tiful tax in theory than the income tax,
The state Grange, seeking to lay an
equitable tax upon those who are able
to pay it, would have come much closer
to it's purpose if it had proposed an
income tax than it does in asking
tax upon. all articles of prop
erty. Even if it could find all the
property in the possession of every citi
zen, it still encounters The difficulty that
the same property is doubly held. l,
suggests a way to avoid this trouble in
the matter of liens upon real estate
it authorizes the tax assessor to
deduct such liens from the value
of the real estate and, while requiring
the owner of the property 10 pay the
tax, permits him to deduct it from the
interest due to the holder of the lien d
provision, by the way, which shows Il
vain attempt 10 relieve the debtor from
the tax OH what he owes, since the
creditor can always make the debtor pay
the value of tue money borrowed. But
the Grange committee, while relieving
from il double tax property that is sub
ject to il recorded lien, entirely fails t.
suggest any way Of SO relieving property
that is otherwise liable for debt. Every
one knows that Il mau may own million:
of personal property and at the same
owe millions in notes and book accounts
He may not be worth Il dollar and ye
under this Grange law be liable for tht
tax on millions of dollars worth of prep
erty ; the tax on the obligations repre-
senting his indebtedness being agail
collected from the holders of them. w,
observe no provision in the prOposet
enactment which authorizes the taXpaye
to deduct what he owes from what he
owns in returning TO the assessor hi
property. Nor would it be practicable t.
put such Il provision in the law. 1t woul,
require the aSSesSor5 to sit in judgMen
upon every mans affairs to determin.
lust what he was worth. a like attemp
was made in Il modified form in the col
lection of the income tax. The collector
undertook to ascertain. not what IL citi
zen was worth, but what his incOm.
was. 1t WAS not often that he sought tt
dispute the statement the citizen made
him although it was not always, anf
perhaps no. generally, that tha!
statement was indsputabe. The non
estest citizens decided all points ii
doubt in their own favor; anu ther,
were enough whose scruples were lnilt
enough to cause them TO slow up very
moderate incomes, though they Wer;
reputed to be in prosperous business. /
was generally believed that the iac0me:
as taxed were not 50 universally
the incomes rs received, us to max,
this tax al equitable one in its bearing
upon the community. Beside which il
was felt that the pryin5 into the private
business of the citizen which the law
OccasiOned was IN insutferab!e nuisance
and so this pretty tax in theory Wa!
abolished after Il brief experience
of it. But its fate does not wavel
the Grange committee which now
asks from the state LegislaturetaX legis
lation that is open 10 all the objection:
against the income tax, and in Il more
serious degree, and is withou, the virtue!
of the income tax to redeem its faults.
Governor and Senator's.
There are different constructions put
,,no,, bo ,nJ Of e.