The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1909-06-24

WTTTv F.yss ~
such sohsms-that 10 to say. the sppraiss-
msnt Of every oompany's real and personal
assets. 10 II thinkable for . moment that
Congress IL going to undertake anything
bordering on that at this extra s~essionf
But even II this should be thought the
very appointed plsoe and time for such An
sndeavor, why-in the name OF every
thing that Is consistent. conservative.
wholesome and undeniably sweet and good
should such q heroulean task be under
taken when It 10 90 wholly unnecessary
and undesirable from either Q political.
moral or patriotic point Of view?
From nc yND York journal Of ConsHsres.
Apart from this question Of constitu-
tional right. such . power Of centralized
supervision 10 Objectionable in itself. 1t
can only be exercised BY inauisitoriai
methods and the exposure of private busi-
ness Affairs In . vexAtious and possibly
injurious way. There are thousands Of
these business corporations engaged In all
manner Of industries and trade. and II
would require 4 complex and costly machin-
cry to assess and collect the proposed tax.
with endless possibilities Of patronage. In
huence. evasion and corruption. Its Just
and equitable operation would not be posi-
Bile. and It's interference with private bust
ness would be intolerable. As . scheme Of
taxation this IL the worst yet proposed.
| A . means OF exercising Federal super
| vision over all manner Of corporations IL
would force into the Constitution some
thing which It's trainers carefully excluded.
and 90 far 10 subvert the character Of the
Government.
From ne Boston Transenpf.
The proponents Of this scheme are begin
ming to SOC some Of its inherent dim
%culties. The shareholders In most States
would be subject to double taxation In event
| Of the Presidents Recommendation beoom-
int law. In several States this burden would
be indirectly felt. In others directly. Take
for example the State Of Massachusetts,,
which taxes all incomes in excess Of $1,000
q year. The corporations pay their taxes.
then the dividends TO stockholders are
liable to local taxation proportionste 10 the
share their aggregate Is Of the individuals
taxable income. Add to the local assss-
sor's requirements the sxaotion OF the Fed
eral collector. and the Massachusetts, share
holders would pay certainly double II not
treble taxation.
From ne PonIan0 Press.
The Presidents plan seemed simple at
FIRST sight. but As soon as 1t Is examined
difficulties appear.
From ne Providence Ersnino Tnsuns.
Difficulties and perplexities OF many
kinds are sure TO arise II to these various
forms of taxing corporations Is added q
Federal tar on net earnings. ' Can the COR
porations stand 1t all. or will the States be
compelled to abandon their taxation Of cor
porations except on realtyf
From ~ Nev YORK Tribune.
1t 10 gratifying to the Tribune to note
the general approval recently given to ito
su suggestion OF about four weeks ago hat
q stamp tax on bank checks and CONNER
cisl paper would serve better as an add
tional source OF Federal revenue than q
tax on iuheritances. q tax on incomes or
q tax on the net receipts OF corporations.
On May ~ we discussed the variou sup
Elementary taxes under consideration at
Washington. and after pointing out the
objections to imposts on inheritances. al
declared Unconstitutional by the Supreme
Court, and ON corporation dividends or net
receipts, because falling unequally and
exemptins one form of income from person
atty while o%vertaxing another. we said:
While those forms Of special taxation all have
their advocates. we wonder Why no one proposes
TO revive tho stamp tax on bank checks and com
mercial paper. The stamp tax on checks 10 one
OF The easiest possible taxes 70 collect. Indeed.
II collects itself. and IL falls e~auitably and lightly
on those who pay It. II has proved In the past
no burden on the public, and Its revival now would
cause little or no complaint. In our opinion II
has more advantages than any one Of the three
taxes now being considered. and 10 open 10 fewer
objections. II would probably raise Just about
the revenue needed to supplement receipts from
customs under the Senate bill.
Since May "a our former neighbor the
New York Times and our neishbor THE
sun have advocated q return to stamp
taxes. So has the Washington Posf, and so
have many other newspapers which properly
consider the stamp tax less onerous. less
ineQuitable and less costly to collect than
any Of the schemes Of taxation which have
been considered by Congress-. Senator
Depew expressed some surprise In An inter.
view published in the Tribune on Sunday
that the availability Of the stamp tax had |
been overlooked. 1t is sdll available.
Why not reenaot 1t As the easiest mi most
practicable solution OF the special tai
problem?
From ne Washington Poa.
The general expression Of the press 10
one OF regret that this complicated, ex-
perimental piece Of legislation should BE-
proposed at this time. whom Congress and
the country are weary Of tariff and taxa
ton problems. The corporation tax Is 4
novelty. and therefore Il requires study
before acceptance. The newspapers seem
to think that certainties and not expert
ments should bs adopted IT this time,
when the prime necessity 10 the raising OF
revenue.
For this reason the stamp tax 10 favored
by many Journals. This tax 10 certain Of
collection. adequate In volume, aud squi. 4
table In application. It falls upon business
and upon the rich. 1t 10 not q novelty, but |