The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1909-09-22

clared dividends OF corporations, sec
! Ondly on rents before leaving the hand
Of the tenants and thirdly upon the in
dividual directly. It was found in Eng
land that a direct income tax at 10 pc
cent did not produce as much revenue a
the present method Of taxation at pc
cent. This he declared illustrated tn,
premium that the direct tax places upOl
perjury and cOncealment.
Corporation Tax Effect.
It is a question, the President declared
| whether incomes earned in salaries anC
| from professional work should be taxed
! as heavily as incomes derived from in
/ vestments or not taxed at all The lat
! ter, he said was the effect Of the cor
! pOTatiOn tax.
The President received a most enthusi
! astic welcome to Denver. Signs were
/ hung at intervals all over the city, read
welcome to Denver, the Summer Cap
Iital"
/ While here the President is the house
guest of United States Senator Hughes,
la Democrat. He held a public reception
of two hours this afternoon at the state
capitol.
At the Auditorium tonight. after a few
preliminary remarks about the extent
and purpose of his trip through the west,
Mr.. Taft touched briefly on the tariff,
saying that while a revision had seemed
essential, there was also deficit IN the
treasury to be met. This partly viii be
met DN a cut u 1tvsDDN.DrU " euN1vyJFVNy III
the appropriations to be made by con-
gress and partly by the income from the
new corporation tax law, Mr. Taft said
he had favored at first an inheritance
tax, but the objection that the states
had pre-empted that field had sufficient
weight to defeat the proposition.
The Presidents Speech.
The President then continued:
"A part of the Republicans and all Of
the Democrats of the senate united In
pressing for consideration general in
come tax on individuals throughout the
United States The law was as near as
could be made to that income tax law,
which had once been considered by the
supreme court some ten years ago and
which was held to be unconstitutional by
a vote of five to four. 1t was conceded
that the tax would probably raise $780,
000.00O to S200, 900 900, which was far in eX-
cess of the needs Of the government if the
tariff bill was to retain its general form,
as proposed, and so to produce revenues
which should be reasonably expected. Our
friends, the Democrats, favored the in
come tax with review to substituting
ii fOv the tariff as an inCOme-prOducing
measure, thus minimizing the effect Of
the tariff in protecting the industries OF
the country.
In other words, the passage of the in
come tax bill would have lent support
probably to the proposition to have tariff
for revenue only, and would have inter
fered with the protective policy to which
the Republican party is pledged.
Declared Unconstitutional
zone further objection to the income !
tax amendment was that It had been de- /
clared unconstitutional by the supreme I
court, and to involve a second decision /
upon that issue was to question the uni |
fOTmity of the decisions of the supreme !
court, and to drag the court into a pOliti- /
cal discussion which whatever It's decision, !
would not make for its standing as an /
mn -rf ] firth al he ]
diversity of view between con-
5reSs and the COurts-tWO coordinate /
reference to the cOnstitu-
ianality of the law which it seemed I'M
wise to perpetuate in a formal statute
But the income tax amendment seemed
lutte likely TO pass by vote of all the
Democrats and sufficient number of
republicans Therefore those who were
opposed TO the income tax amendment /
ooked about to see if a compromise |
Ould not be proposed less Objectionable
han the income tax amendment, which
would satisfy enough Republicans who
we're inclined to favor the income tax to
revent the passage of that amendment.
Corporation Tax Law.
such a compromise was found in a
roposal to pass the present corporation
ak, and also the joint resolution already
eIerred to, proposing an amendment of
ne FEDERAL constitution to the states
uthOriZing the general government to i'm
USE an lICDlllt lax WITHOUT dDDGTTlOD11E / s
as a direct tax according to the pop |
iatlOn Of the states. The provisions |
lr the corporation tax in the bill EXEMPT ,
Il corporations whose net income does | :
OF exceed 5000. It is therefore, in effect.
n income tax; that is, it taxes earnings
5tualy made. It is a tax upon success
nd not failure.
The most Objectionable feature Of di-
ct income tax is the premium upon per /
Try which it offers to those who are
Hing to conceal their incOme-a matter
d at all difficult TO dO-and who thus j
ibJect to much heavier prOportionate
lrden those who are conscientious i'm
aklng their returns and who paw their Z
as the law intended. So great was
rs evil in the levy of an income tax IN
nsIa,hd that Wnen that tax was imposed }
rectly upon individuals, as was pro-
sed here IN the sO-Called income tax
hehuInent Dill, II was found that the
oceeds Of a tax at 10 per cent were z
; :, IN man lhe proceeds OF an income tax
m law, not upon the individuals direct r
out upon the income before it comes
TO their hands.
This is a practical argument in favor Il
the corporation income tax as against
, ndiVldual income tax, that is alto
Their unanswerable
Tax Easily Collected.
tt IS a corporation tax easily collected
that no corporation can escape-one
which perjury cannot play any import
{ part at all in an effort to escaDe il -
Another feature Of il is that incident y
Y it viii give the federal Eovernmsn+
opportunity to secure most valuable III
in respect to the conduct of
poratiOns, their actual financial con- | OF
ions, which they are required to show
general terms in a public return. In | sh
litiOn, the law provides that means
Ter proper limitations of investigating gu
~ and in detail their course OF bust
IS. hi,
This is to be done only after the com. he,