The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1898-05-28
INCOME TAN.

1t seems trite and unnecessary to
argue the income tax proposition ov-
er again. 1t has occupied the atten-
ton of the public for three or four
wears. 1t has been written about
from all points of view. 1t has been
argued upon. at public meetings, its
merits and dement's have been eX-
pounded by every member of two leg
legislatures. 1t has occupied the time
of the Supreme Court, and through 1T
all, though there are conscientious
workers against it, vet the general
consensus of opinion is in its favor.
But in spite of everything that may
be favorable it's fate still hangs in the
balance, and what the fate of this
hard fought measure will be, will not
be known till Tuesday, when probably
the final battle will take place.
From the indications now the bill
will pass the House, and has some
good chance of life in the Senate. The
other move in the game is the repeal
of Schedule L. A majority of those
in favor of the income tax bill,
is in honor bound to support, and a
number against the income tax will
support, but it will have opponents
from the ranks of both parties. The
logical position of either set in this
matter is hard to understand.
From the side of the supporters of
maintained that Schedule E was a
form of tax which caused great fric
ton. The foremost principle of tax
alton is that friction in the levying
and collection of taxes should be
avoided. Thus it is evident tax which
causes friction may be put down as
a bad tax. The arguments brought
forward in support of the income tax
are that it is the fairest tax that can
be levied, that it is easily collected,
and that it avoids unnecessary fric>
ton. A supporter of the income tax,
ought not, logically, to be a support
err of the retention of Schedule E.
On the other hand those who are
opposed to the income tax, if that tax
is passed, surely do not want the re-
tention of Schedule Z plus the in
come tax, and yet that is the illogical
position of some members in the
House. Many of the opponents of the
income tax, however, are in honor
bound to vote with those of the in
come tax supporters against Schedule
e, and the action will carry. ay
The fear is expressed that when the
bills go to the Senate the, action TAX
en- will be to kill the income tax bill
and acquiesce in the repeal of Sched-
ule f. In the first place the Senate
would never do so unjust or foolish
thing; in the second they would not
countenance anything so dishonest.
The necessity of revenue for the gov.
eminent is as patent to every Sena-
tor as it is to every member of the
House, and the Senate is not going
to embarrass the government by do.
ing anything that will take away a
large slice of revenue, and not give il
quid pro quo.
Within couple of years from now
the general public will be quite salts
fled that an income tax has been es
tablshed and the Minister of Finance
will find means ready to his hand by
which, with little or no friction, he
can ask to raise or lower the revenue
as necessary, and have no injustice
done to any man. The argument that
we had better wait, that the present
is a transistory state, and that the
revenue reform should not be under
taken now, is one that has been useG
for aeons of time by those who are
opposed to progress. According tc
certain classes of minds in commu
nifty it is never time to make a step il
advance. 1t is always next year, OIL
two years hence, or somewhere in tn,
distant future, and it is a grand plar
to appoint committees to investigate
and these may or may not report
The time for reform is now. The re
former is the man of the present, ant
what he wants done, he desires ac
complished quickly
AN IMPORTANT DECISION.