The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1906-12-15
The President On
The inheritance Tax


necessary at present to discuss. 1t is
wise that progress in this direction
should be gradual At first a perma-
nent national Inheritance tax, while it
might be more substantial than any
such tax has hitherto been, need not
approximate, either in amount or in
the extent of the increase by gradua-
ton to what such a tax should ulti-
mately be.
This species of tax has again and
L gais been imposed altho only tenn
lporarily, by the National Government.
| At was first imposed by the act of
July 6, 1897 when the makers of the
constitution were alive and at the
head of affairs. 1t was a graduated
tax; tho small in amount, the rate
Twas increased with the amount left to
ANY individual, exceptions being made
in the case of certain close kin. A
similar tax was again imposed by the
act of July 1, 1862; a minimum sum of
one thousand dollars in personal prop
erty being excepted from taxation, the
tax then becoming progressive accord
ing to the remoteness of kin. The /
NdI-ICNtlluC tlCl VI a uAlG Aoy 1900 pAS
vided for an inheritance tax on any |
sum exceeding the value of ten thou
sand dollars, the rate of the tax in
creasing both in accordance with the
amounts left and in accordance with
the legatee's remoteness of kin. The
Supreme Court has held that the sue,
cession tax imposed at the time of
the Civil War was not a direct tax
but an impost or excise which was
both constitutional and valid More
recently the court, in an opision de-
livered by Mr.. Justice White, which
contained an exceedingly able ana
elaborate discussion of the powers of
the Congress to impose death duties
: sustained the constitutionality of the
inheritance-tax feature of the war.
revenue act of 1898.
INCOME TAX DIFFICULT.
In its incidents, and apart from the
main purpose of raising revenue, an
income tax stands on an entirely diff
ferent footing from an inheritance tax;
because it involves no question of the
perpetuation of fortunes swollen to an
unhealthy size. The question is in it's
essence question of the proper adj
justment of burdens to benefits. AS
the law now stands it is undoubtedly
difficult to devise a national income
tax which shall be constitutional But
, whether it is absolutely impossible is
, another question:; and if possible it is
mostly certainly desirable. The first
, purely income-tax law was passed by
the Congress in 1861, but the most i'm
portant law dealing with the subject
was that of 1894 This the court held
to be unconstitutional.
: The question is undoubtedly very
intricate, delicate and troublesome.
q Inc decision of the court was only
n reached by one majority. 1t is the law
OF the land, and of course is accepted
= as such and Loyalty obeyed by all
:, good citizens. Nevertheless, the hesi-
a tation evidently felt by the court as a.
e "hoIe IN coming to conclusion, when
" considered together with the previous
: decisions on the subject, may perhaps
: indicate the possibility of devising a
= constitutional income-tax law which
=. snail substantially accomplish the re-
: suits aimed at. The difficulty of amend
r ing the constitution Is so great that
l only real necessity can justify a re-
I sort thereto. Every effort should be
made in dealing with this subject, as
t with the subject of the proper control
by the National Government over the
D use of corporate wealth in interstate
, business, to devise legislation which
without such action shall attain the
s desired END; but If this fails, there will
7 Ultimately be no alternative to a con-
( stitutional amendment.