New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1909-08-11
CHANCES or TIRE INCOME TAX.


Discussing the chances of the constitutional
amendment now before the states empowering
The federal government TO lay direct taxes with
out regard To the present apportionment limita-
ton, The 81 Louis Globe Democrat said tie
other day:
The fight on the tax viii be exciting The real
interest upon II will come when the proposition
is brought before the larger states New YORK
will undoubtedly go against it. So probably,
will Ohio and Illinois. on account of the large
urban element in the population Of those states.
In Missouri the vote VIII be close All of the
New England States are expected 10 declare
against H. so are New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware and West Virginia.
According 10 The Globe Democrats" view,
the contest will be between the larger states,
with property interests which viii have 10 bear
The chief burden Of the proposed tax, together
with certain smaller Eastern states rejecting
the sentiment of their greater neighbors and,
ON the opposite side, the states with sparser
population and less developed commerce and
industries, which viii contribute comparatively
little 10 The government under scheme of in
come taxation. The line of cleavage thus in
Dictated is u natural one from the point of view
of economics. Were the states TO he governed
fn their action by the single consideration of
state advantage. those which would be relative
ly oVertaNed under il would undoubtedly unite
10 def at the amendment Those likely TO es-
cape with small levies would favor federal Ia xa-
tion 50 conveniently adjusted for their pur-
poses.
The economic motive s however. not the
only one entering into the calculation There
is disturbing political factor. Federal taxa
ii0n il essentially a national problem although
il has local aspect and an acute effect on
local interests. 4 national political pariv may
adopt policy not very palatabe 10 its members
tn certain states or sections. Yet the influence
az the national declaration may he 50 strong as
20 cause many 10 hesitate between local and
national demands. For example the Demo-
cratic party has many times pronounced in
favor Of federal income tax. Ia its last na
tioaal platform II specifically urged the submis-
sion 81 constitutional amendment aufhoriZin.
Congress 10 levy and collect tax on indiy idual
md corporate incomes VIII Democrats in the
states which would have 10 bear Tho brunt of
The proposed tax consider state interests para
mount and the pledge of their party as 81
secondary Importance: II is hard la tell. Tho
recent ncmocratic State Convention in Penn
sylvania passed resolution favorinc the rati
ncHflon Of the income tax amendment. Thai
pledge may not have been entirely sincere. But
q points 10 a conflict of motives and influence.
in the larger states which must be reckoncd
with ia forecasting their action. State con
seriousness is ~ low ebb nowadays and II
Nv"iu ifot pe NiSe 10 count on IL 100 Tar Il
resist the pressure Of political partys ma
ional obligations
81 a real cleavage between the larger ano
The smaller states should develop there would h,
title cbnnce az direct tax legislation such a,
'he pending amendment is intended 10 author
49,. the Globe-Demo1atr names lourieel
states IA which defeat Of the amendment i,
prolahle II might have added 10 those Mary
laid which H. undoubtedly more conservative
on the income tax issue than l. Missouri al
Nest Virginia. Twelve states could defeat