Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1909-09-22

and the court-two coordinate
branches-With reference to the con-
stttuttonality of the law which it
seemed unWisc to %perpctuatc in a for
maj statute. But the income tax am
cndment seemed quite likely to pass
by vote of all the democrats and a sur
ilcient number Of republicans. There
torc those who We're opposed to the
income tax amendment looked about
70 see II a compromise could not be
secured, less Objectionable than the
income tax amendment. which would
satisfy enough republicans who were
inclined To favor the income tax TO
prevent the passage OF that amend
ment Such a compromise was found
IN a proposal to pass the present cor
poration tax and also the Joint resolu-
tion already referred to, proposing an
amendment of the federal constitution
to the states authorizing the general
government 10 impose an income tax
without apportioning il as a direct tax
according to the population of the
states.
The provisions for the corporation
tax in the bill, exempt all corporations
whose net income does not exceed So
000. 1t is therefore, in effect an in
come tax. that is it taxes earnings.
actually made. 1t is a tax upon sue
cess and not failure
THE most Objectionable feature of
the tax is the premium upon per
jury. which ii offers To those who are
willing to conceal their income--a
matter not at all difficult to do-and
who thus subject to 4 much heavier
proportionatc burden those who are
conscientious in making their return
and who pay their tax as thu law in
tended. So great was this evil in the
levy of an income tax in England that.
when that tax was imposed directly
upon individuals. aS WAS proposed
here in the s|o-callvd income tax ann
cndment bin. the proceeds of the
tax at ten per cent. were less
than the proceeds of the income
tax of five per cent. imposed as
II corporation tax Is, not upon
the individuals directly, but upon
the income before it ONE into THEN
hands. This is a practical argument
II AAN'i VI Nllt - libi iiN'iif -
against an individual income tax.
that is, altogether unanswerable.
In England. after Il hundred years
Of experience, the income tax is levied
in only exceptional instances on the
individual directly. 1t is first levied
the declared dividends of cOrpor-
ations, secondly. on rents before they
leave the hands of the tenants and,
finally. III the individual with respect
to matters that are not covered by
and corporation investments.
another distinction which is made
in the English law, and which COM
Of Justice is that the income tax on
passive and permanent investments
like the stocks and bonds in a cor
poration, should be higher than on
armed incomes, that is, incomes earn
ed by the services of the individual |
rs salary or as "A professional income
Another criticism of the corpora
Lion tax in the present bill is that
only shares of stock in corporation en-
.erprises are thus taxed and that those
who own bonds, secured By mortgage |
upon the entire property or plant OF
the corporation. do not pay amy tax
Il I'll. This is true. and the defect was
fully recognized by those who drafted
corporation tax. They would have
oecn glad if possible to impose a tax
bOnd holders who are only less
Interested in the earnings and success
If the corporations han are stock
lolders; but the difficulty OF including
Eem ana collecting from the corpor-
before the payment of interest