The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1912-09-19
DON'T KILL THtGO0SE THAT
LAYS THE GOLDEN EGG,
SAYS TAXATION EXPERT
A. c. Pleydell Favors Levy Sys-
TEN Which Interferes Least
With Production of Wealth
CORPORATIONS SUFFER
CORPORATIONS SUFFER
Some Subjected to Excessive
Burdens, Speaker Claims
Tax Conference Begins

Taxation officials and others, repre-
senting q different counties in Mich
igan besides representatives OF the
farmers, commercial organizations
and labor met In the first tax con
ference ever held In Michigan, In the
council chambers. Wednesday morn
ing. The meeting was arranged by
the Detroit Board Of Commerce. More
than q hundred were present.
The convention was called TO order
by George Lord, chairman OF the com
mittee on arrangements, and j. T.
Leland, OF Corunna, president Of the
STATE Association OF Farmers Clubs.
was escorted to the chair. George b.
Horton was nominated to be vice
chairman, and William B. Wreford,
was named secretary.
After the appointment OF commit
tees on resolutions, rules and pro-
gram, permanent organization and
credentials the conference got down
to business.
Mayor Thompson welcomed the
delegates to Detroit and suggested
that they remember the golden rule
In their deliberations on the tax prob
lem. Mayor C. 8. Mott, OF Flint, and
former Mayor Daniel w. Powell, OF
Marquette, responded.
The first speaker was James N.
Mcbride, OF Burton, who talked on
Taxation OF the farm and its prod
ucts." Mr.. Mcbride advanced the idea
that amortization should be taken
into account In taxing farm property,
and that the farmer should not be
taxed for the value which he adds
to his farm by his individual manage
ment and ability. He claimed that
the farmer pays a tax on income be-
cause his income Is merged with the
product Of his land.
A general discussion followed Mr..
McBride's talk and the conference ad-
journed at noon to 60 to the Cadillac
hotel, as guests of the Board Of Com
merce at luncheon.
After luncheon. at which many
members OF the Board Of Commerce
talked on General taxation" and A.
C. Pleydell Of New York. secretary Of
the National Tax association talked
on Taxation OF industrial corpora
tions." saying in part:
THE subject assigned to me Is the
taxation of industrial corporations.
understand this term to include prac-
tically all corporations engaged in
manufacture and distribution, except
financial and public utility corpora
tions.
There are various theories OF taxa
tion and many honest differences OF
opinion as to the best and fairest rule
by which to test the laws that secure
the revenue for governmental pur
roses. One of the leading theories,
which has many ardent advocates
among the economists. Is that taxes
should be levied in proportion to the
ability to pay. An older theory now
coming to the front again and to
which in general l subscribe, is that
taxes should be levied in proportion
to the benefit received from the gov
eminent and it's expenditures.
Mention may be made also Of the
brilliant thought ascribed to the
finance minister Of a French king.
that the real science OF taxation was
to get the most feathers from the
geese with the least squawking!'
Industrial corporations are sub
ject not only to the same tax burdens
that fall upon industry when conduct
ed by individuals or partnerships, but,
In addition, to various extra taxes
imposed upon the corporate form OF
doing business.
Defends state Taxation.
Practically every state derives a
considerable portion OF the state rev.
enue from taxes levied upon corpora.
far n raRfvfInax ~
doing business in a corporate form.
So long as such taxes are moderate
IN amount, they are justihable as a
proper return for benefit conferred.
There are certain advantages given
by the state to persons who do bust
ness In the form OF corporation, for
which some return should be made.
But so long as any group OF persons
can incorporate, there can be no such
special privilege attached to the cor.
porate form of doing business az TO
justify the very heavy taxes some
times sought to be imposed upon cor
porate enterprise. No doubt some OF
the agitation in favor OF extracting a
large revenue from industrial corpor-
ations has resulted from the failure
of the public to discriminate between
the very large privileges given to
public service corporations which in
addition to their mere corporate en-
tity, obtain what Is TO a certain ex'
tent a monopoly in rights-of-way, and
the business corporations that secure
practically nothing from the govern
ment which is not readily available
to all.
Some states levy the privilege tax
on corporations by fixed rule based
on a certainty like the par value OF
shares issued or authorized. But In
other states, the value for taxation Ia
fixed by the arbitrary judgment OF an
assessing body, upon information and
by methods that cannot possibly be
tested by the general public, and
without remedy for the corporation
unfairly treated as against its com
petitor.
Many inequalities Exist.