Washington sentinel., 1901-01-26
$3.50 Beer Tax.

Brewers are to be congratulated
on the successful outcome OF their
fight for lower rate in the Senate.
The Finance Committee Of that
body has reported in favor Of
further cut OF 10 cents in the beer
tax, thus reducing it from 81 IS 70
$3.50 per barrel. This action
means a saving to brewers OF about
SI4, 900 900 a year, The commit
tees substitute does not take the
form Of straight reduction, but is
an increase in the rebate allowed.
It reads as follows:
That on and after July I, 1901, there
shall be allowed a discount OF IS per
centum on all sales by collectors to
brewers and manufacturers Of tobacco
and snuff upon the stamps provided for
the payment OF internal revenue taxes
upon beer and manufactured tobacco
and snuff. Provided that the discount
allowed to brewers upon beer stamps
shall be in lieu OF the discount OF 7 a per
centum allowed by the act Of June I5,
1898 The effect is to reduce the beer
tax to 81. 50 per barrel and on snuff and
tobacco to 9 cents a pound,
Early in the week the prospects
were not as bright as might be
wished, owing to proposed reduc-
tions in thetobacco schedule which
added about $4,000, 900 to the
House bill. To offset this and to
provide a waV tor further relief to
brewers (the Senate, as we have
frequently said, always favored
larger reductions to this business)
the tax on bank checks was re-
p aced and other changes were
made so as to make possible the
action desired.
The result was not reached with
out the greatest amount OF hard
work Opposition arose on all
sides. Every scheme clamoring
for recognition from Congress re-
solved itself into lobby to urge
the retention OF the beer tax, whose
advocates were compelled to exert
a constant and persistent vigilance
IN order TO attain their aims.
From the opening Of Congress,
and long before. the Trustees Of
the United States Brewers Asso-
citation, through their committees,
have been on hand to watch every
move and take advantage Of every
opportu nifty. Their efforts have
been ably seconded by individuals,
in and out Of Congress, and it is
no disparagement of any mans
services to say that the WASHING.
TON SENTINEL contributed material
and valuable aid in the successful
termination Of the Trustees labors.
There is one point in the bill as
reported where, it seems to US, a
change might be made. AS passed
by the House, the law would have
gone into effect about Feb. 1. It
will not take effect under its pres.
ent form until July 7. Between
Feb. and July 1, under the
House measure brewers would
have saved $4,000, 900; the Senate
measure, by continuing the present
law until July 1, deprives brewers
oi the benefits which would have
been derived from the House bill,
and causes them a loss equal to
years savings from the 10 cent
additional reduction granted by
the Senate. II it is not the inten-
ton TO give with one hand and
take away with the other, the law
should be allowed to take effect
upon its passage, and we hope
such a change will be made when
the bill comes up for discussion
next week.
We shall call attention Of Sem
ators to this discrepancy.
The bill will not be called up in
the Senate until early in the coming
week, but Of its passage in its pres
ent form there is little doubt, and
even less that it will meet with op-
position when it goes to confer
ence. It is not what the brewers
were entitled to, but It is as much |
as can be gotten now, and will be |
appreciated accordingly. Again
we say the brewers are to be con-