New-York tribune., 1907-01-17
THE TAX COMMISSIONS REPORT.

AS discussion of taxation theories ana
problems the report of the Tax REVISION Cohi-
mission just submitted TO the Legislature, mas
a positive, If somewhat academic, value In
the exercise of no legislative function is en-
lightened leadership more needed than IN the
apportionment among individuals of the costs
and burdens of government. Taxation systems
develop slowly and resist change more OBJ
stinately than most of the contriyances on
which we depend to enforce the social COM
pact We accept taxes, 1t is said, much as we
accept DEATH and are rather skeptical about
suggestions intended to increase our chances
of avoiding either 1t is we'll to challenge this
fatalistic spirit occasionally and TO examine
critically the theories which costs are dis
tributed and benefits appraised. The public
generally has as little knowledge Of the eco
nomics of taxation as ii has of the refinements
of metaphysics, and it is all the more liable
on that account to be carried away by imprac-
ticable and dazzling schemes for supporting
the state whose single motive is to lit the
burdens of taxation entirely from the shoul-
ders of one class or to impose them entirely on
the shoulders of another.
There is much sound logic and much helpful
information in the commissions report as the
result of patient work and an earnest desire
TO serve the state. But we do not expect to
see its recommendations embodied to any con-
siderable extent in legislation. The taxation
problem is vast and difficult and the commits
sion has evidently felt some embarrassment IN
dealing with 1t. The attitude displayed Is not
exactly one Of confidence. For instance, six
excellent reasons are given for abandoning the
personal property tax. That form Of taxation
is now universally recognized as futile and
inequitable and the commission only slays the
slain when it exposes the abSurdity of our
present personally tax system. Yet, as we
understand it. the report does not actually rec
ommend surrendering a source of revenue the
collection of which has brought the whole tax
ing power into rldicule. Again, the commits
sion argues strongly in favor of an extension
Of the inheritance taxes. Yet 1t fails to show
how large an increase IN revenue would result
from that extension or to propose offsettlng this
increase by dropping other taxes. The sug-
gestion that the state collect enough to pay its
annual expenditures and lay up besides sur
plus of S100O000O and that the excess above
that figure be redistributed to the counties,
seems to US too vague to serve the founda-
ton for q workable tax system. The adop-
ton of such an elastic scheme would be an
invitation TO wholesale extravaganza. and a
wise legislature would shrink from passing a
law authorizing the raising Of revenues likely
to be clearly in excess Of the states actual
needs.
In spite of predictions to the contrary, the
an income tax. This was a sensible decision,
for an income tax is open to the same objec- |
tons as the personally tax, as we'll as to others
not less serious, and It would be relatively as |
unproductive unless the processes Of an often |
sve and demoralizing inquistion were far more |
drastlcally conducted. Any single state is at |
a great disadvantage in enforcing such taxes, |
because Of the ease with which legal residences
can be shifted, and even the inheritance tax can
be evaded by moving out OF one state into |
another. These taxes, to reach all impartialIy, |
would have to be levied by the federal gov |
ernment Yet the commission argues stoutly |
against an invasion by the federal taxing power |
Of field in which 1t can work more readily |
and effectively than the state. or all the forms |
OF indirect taxation, SO called the habitation |
tax seems to be the most workable, But this |
device is favored only by a minority of the |
commissioners.
To sum up the Legislature Is practically |
asked to pass a number Of suggestions |
which are offered tentatively rather than with |
conviction and authority. Our tax laws could |
doubtless be bettered and distribution Of tbe |
cost OF government could be secured more in |
accord with modern social conditions. But con. |
servatism on this question is traditional and !
sound policy suggests only the most gradual |
readjustment Of burdens to which as q noliti |
cal and social community we have long grown |
accustomed.