The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1903-07-17

The report was as follows:
Geo. w. Smith ESQ,
President Merchants Association.
Dear Sir:-Your Committee on Public
Affairs appointed beg leave to report
as follows
The first work presented to your COM
mittee which called for immediate ac-
ton was the proposal under County
Government to re-establish the old sys-
TEN of levying license on the mer-
chants of the Territory both wholesale
and retail. AS the business interests
OF the country are already taxed in
other ways for all they can stand your
committee felt it incumbent on them
to combat this proposition with all the
vigor possible An interview was
sought and obtained with the Republi-
can Central Committee in caucus, with
the members elect to the Legislature
and the views of your committee were
fully and freely expressed as opposed
to any such license. We were aided in
this protest by Mr.. f. W. Macfarlane
and Mr.. NJ. A. Gonsalves and Others
who protested vigorously against any
such enactment. 1t was urged that the
burden already carried by the business
men was all they could bear, and that
a license for the. privilege to do bust
ness was unfair and contrary to the
custom in vogue in the large cities of
the mainland, except such business
which called for and required police
supervision. 1t was represented that
it was unfair to license those doing
business locally while commercial men
from the mainland had free access to
our markets without taxes or expenses
of any kind.
We represented that we were taxed
on our real estate, our stock in trade,
and a tax on our incomes. That we
had to pay rents and clerk hire. That
we had to meet the demands of charity
and other subscriptions, and that COM
mercial concerns of the mainland were
under-selling us by the taxes imposed
on us, they being absolutely free of any
tax income or otherwise.
We We're listened to attentively and
courteously, but the consensus of opin-
ion was that license of some sort
should be imposed, not only as mat
ter of revenue, but as possible check
to Oriental competition which was
considered as, and is, serious. We were
promised an opportunity to present our
views before the legislative committees
during the session, but apparently this
promise was overlooked as we were
never given an opportunity to appear,
but through the individual efforts of
your committee, the County bill was
passed levying a license of the least
Objectionable nature, and which on the
whole may be benefit to the business
men on the lines suggested already.
The law as it now stands reads that
Ten Thousand Dollars the fee shall be
$4,000 For sales exceeding $4,000, and
not more than 100000, the fee shall
be 500. For sales exceeding 100000
and not more than 100000, the fee shall
be $3.50. and for sales exceeding 100000,
the fee shall be $500. Your commit
tee feels that in view of the evident
determination of the law-making bodies
to impose IA license, the terms as out
lined above are not as severe as they
might have been, and we would urge
that the efforts of the Association be
continued looking to the eventual re-
peal of this tax, in conformity with the
practice in vogue in the older and
larger cities of the mainland.
INCOME TAX.
Our efforts We're next directed to the
repeal or amendment of the Income
Tax, tax which, without doubt is the
most Objectionable of any levied on the
business and other interests of the COM
munity. Not that the business men
of the Territory desire to shirk any just
tax levied for the interests of the coun-
try, but because they object to the
inquisitive and prying nature OF the
Income Tax law which is almost who'll
ly paid by the business men whose
books and accounts are arbitrarily
opened for public inspection. 1t is
notorious that large percentage of
those who should pay income tax es-
cape because they claim to have no
books and have no knowledge of what
their income is while the burden is
L brown n ha hI,ri..ar.- |