The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-09-22
Would Make Periurers.

success and not failure
Would Make Periurers.
THE most Objectionable feature of a
dlrect income tax is the premium on
perjury which 1t offers to those who are
Wiling to conceal their incomes-a
matter not at all difficult to do-and
who thus subject to a much heavier
proportionate burden, those who are
conscientious in making their returns
and who pay their tax as the law in
tehded So great was this evil in the
levy or an income tax in England that
Wnen That tax was imposed directly
upon individuals, as was proposed here
IN the so-called income tax amend
ment bill, it was found that the pro
ceeds of the tax at 10 per cent were less
than the proceeds of an income tax of
per cent imposed, as our caruoration
TAX is. not upon the individuals direct
~ put upon the income before it comes
into their hands. This is prart,c II
argument in favor of the corn3ration
income tax as against an individual :l-
able. " "a
Another distinction which is made,
IN the English law, and which com
mends itself to everyone with q sense
OF justice, is that the income tax on
passive and permanent investments
nKe the stocks and bonds in a eopora-
ton should be higher than on earned
incomes, taht is incomes earned nv
the services of the individual as SALARY
or as professional income Earned
incomes thus described are really the
proceeds of an application of the can
itaI of the individual which is being
consumed and will be entirely used
Up at the end of his professional life
OF twenty or thirty years, whereas. the
Investments will continue without re-
gard as to whether the owner lives or
dies, and will pass on by succession of
law undimfnished and without reduc-
&c ieff
fes making difference between. a tax
upon the income by services either by
making the rate less, or by not taxing
the earned incomes at all. The latter
IS the erect OF the corporation tax.
Points Out Defect.
Another criticism of the CORPORA
ton tax in the present bill is that only
shares of stock in corporate enter
prises are thus taxed, and that those
who own bonds secured by mortgage
the corporation do not pay any tax at
all. This is true, and the defect was
fully recognized by those who drafted
hte corporation tax. They would have
been glad If possible to impose a tax
upon the bondhoIders who are only
less interested in the earnings and sue
cess of the corporations than are
stockholders; but the difficulty of in
Guiding them and of collecting from
the corporation before the payment of
interest an income tax of percentage
of the interest to be paid on the bonds
was that thus to impose a tax on the
bondhoIders proportional to the inter
est received would be in violation of
the constitution as interpreted by the
supreme court, rs an income tax not
apportioned among the states.
Nov, If the proposed amendment
to the constitution authorizing the i'm
position of an income tax, without ap-
portioning it among the states accord
ing to population, passes, it will be
possible to add to our corporation. tax
the feature of imposing a percentage
tax upon bonded interest to be paid,
thus reducing the amount of interest
which the corporation would paw to
the bondholders to the extent of the
tax collected. This would make the
corporation tax a more beneficial
measure and one reaching interests
that ought to be reported because un-
der modern systems of financing the
bondholders and. stockholders are all
of them in sense joint investors, and
a corporation income tax ought to in
clude them all
An Equitable Burden.
Under the conditions that existed