The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1908-09-13

The question of the taxation of insur-
ance companies will be decided in con-
nection with the consideration of life
insurance laws and the establishment
of state insurance department by the
next legislature. The underwriters
have already started a determined fight
TO prevent. If possible, the taxation of
insurance companies, and the follow
ing statement was issued yesterday on
behalf of the local underwriters asso-
citation:
THE next legislature will be called
upon to consider life insurance laws
and the establishment of an INSURANCE.
department Among all the important
questions will be that OF the taxation of
insurance companies, or in other words,
the taxing of Dolicyholders. 1t is not
too early to invite at this time the at
tention Of not only every lawmaker,
but every holder of a policy to this
question, and a few ideas are advanced
at this time for consideration.
John Stuart Mill in his Principles of
Political Economy says that a tax upon
life insurance is a direct discourage
ment of prudunce and forethought.'
Mills view is practically accepted by
Mccullough, who states that such a tax
'discourages that providence and fore
thought. encouragement ofsghich ought
TO be an object with all prudent gov
ernments.' and seeing the vast impor-
tance of insurance, it may well be
doubted whether II ought to be charged
with any duty. however slight
Professor hartman of Yale univer-
sity. specialist on the subject Of life
insurance, in concluding an exhaustive
review on the subject. says:
1--WE conclude. then, that taxation of
life insurance assets and premiums is
wrong. If II is wrong. the taxes should
not be levied
These expressions of the views of
persons who have given special study
to this subject harmonic with the opin-
ions OF all authorities we have found
who have gone below the mere sur
face of the question. No person who
has taken the trouble carefully to con-
slider the real objects and purposes of
life insurance. the high sentiments that
move the insured to carry it. and the
effects of such taxation on the cost of
life insurance or on the amount of in
surance in force. undertakes to justify
IL. With one accord well Informed peo-
pie condemn IL. They agree that its
very existence is attributable to a mis-
understanding of life insurance and of
the true meaning and effect of the tax.
supplemented by a desire to get money
for the revenue wherever the money
can be gotten, without much regarding
the right or the wrong of the thing
IF a premium income tax did not cor
respondingly increase the cost of insur-
ance or reduce the amount of IL, and II
II could be justified on any ground. yet
II is discriminatory TO impose this tax on
life insurance alone. and the rate inn
posed is excessive
The man who pays a premium upon
a policy providing a death benefit for
his family must surely be given credit
for being wholly unselfsh. for he knows
that he will not profit by IT himself. and
that he will not be present to see his
loved ones enjoy the fruits Of his I'M
selfish devotion to their welfare.
why should the state lax this man
for his most worthy and commendable
act In guarding his family from misery
and want after he had passed away?
IF this is a fair and honorable thing
to do. would it not also be fair and
honorable to demand portion of the
contents of the contribution boxes at
our churches. for these offerings are
often collected for the benefits OF the