The Neihart herald. [volume] (Neihart, Mont.) 1890-1901, 1895-04-20
It is a Bad Decision.

Salt Lake Tribune: The Treasury
officials are very much at sea con-
corning the effect of the Supreme
Court decision on the income tax
law. 1t is plain to be seer that they
are almost in despair, especially in
view of the probable complete an
nulment of the law on the other
suits to be brought. If, as the dis
patch says, a tax on rents and profits
on land investments is not to be seq
regated from a direct tax on land it.
self, then under the same line of rea-
soning, the products of land are also
exempt, and those who deal in them
escape the income tax law. This lets
out grain spectators, lumbermen,
mines and mine-owners, and may
even release railroads, telegraphs and
all the companies that must have
land for their operations. The more
the line of reasoning taken by the
| Supreme Court is considered, the
more ~far-reaching does it appear.
1t is on this construction relating to
land that the most dissatisfaction will
ensue: for there seems to be a reason
ably plain line Of demarkation be-
tween a tax on land direct and IA tax
on rents and profits on land deals
and on handling the products of land
That the Supreme Court couldn't see
this reasonable distinction seems
strange, and we do not believe that
Chief Justice Fuller's reasoning will
stand the test of time. The fact is,
the very purpose of the law was to
reach the heavy interests that now
escape, and the huge estates Xix
those of the Astors, Vanderbilts and
the like, that consist largely OF land,
the from which are Drin.
cipally in rents and privileges. AT
no former hearing on income tax
Legislation was there ever a doubt
expressed that an income tax on rents
was valid. We believe now hat i
,
is legal, in spite of the court, which
has certainly got off wrong, and the
Supreme Court will eventually have
to reverse itself, as it has done be
fore on other subjects.
A practical point that troubles the
Treasury Department is whether a
person who, being subject to income
tax, is tie be allowed to deduct tn,
gross receipts of the year from rents
land deals, etc, and charge up ex'
penses of such rents and deals upor
his remaining income after that de
duction. Without doubt the Su
preme Court would say yes to this
question, on the same line of reason
ing set forth on the main proposition
But with that answer, precious little
of the income tax law will be left t.
enforce. And that is just what W.
believe about it: the portion left ism
worth while; the decision is a practi
cal Knockout for the law.
We beg to add further, that it i
precisely such decisions as this tina
have in large created ant
from time to time added to the pre-
found dissatisfaction that ~certainl
exists. The people see justice an
fair dealing so often trampled dow
-, in the courts; they behold in tn
courts the bulwark and shield of tn
, rich at the expense of the poor, an
the protection of favored interests i
the damage of the general public,
such an extent that taxation is shlf
ed from shoulders best able to bea
it to those least able to pay at al
The result is a mighty growth {
Socialism and Anarchy, and, after
y while, unless a halt is called, IL
bulwark of our political order vi
be swept awa y.