New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-10-04
THE INCOME TAX BURDEN
Mr.. Kingsley's View Is Declared TO
Be Erroneous.

To the Editor of The Tribune
Sir: I have been reading in The Tribune
Of to-day what Darwin p. Kingsley.
president Of the New York Life Insurance
Company. is therein quoted as saying
relevant to the income tax provisions Of
the federal tax BILL which has been agreed
Upon by the conference committee of the
two houses of Congress and which was
agreed TO by the House yesterday and
ELL probably be agreed TO by the Senate
and signed by the President within a few
days. / was particularly interested in the
statements of Mr.. Kingsley because I
have been carefully studying those income
tax provisions. I'm the various forms which
they have assumed during their pendency
In Congress, for the purpose OF shortly
publishing a pamphlet Analysing and ex-
planning those provisions as finally en-
acted.
on Wednesday morning I received from
one OF the Senators a printed copy OF ths
entire bill. as it was agreed TO by the
conference committee last Saturday and
was adopted by the House last Tuesday.
find that that conference committee bill
agrees with the bill as it passed the SEN
ate in the respects mentioned BY Mr.
Kingsley and | now write TO express MY
opinion that Mr.. Kingsley is in error in
fearing that the bill, when enacted, will
operate to impose an income tax upon
the obligations of a state or any pollti-
cal subdivision thereof, and upon the obi
cations OF the United States or its posses
sions" when and where such obligations
are held by insurance companies or other
corporations.
Mr. kingsley correctly quotes the rele'
want language of the bill as follows: That
in computing net income under this sec
ton there shall be excluded the interest
uron the obligation of a state or any po-
litical subdivision thereof. and upon the
obligations OF tho United States or It's
possessions"
Mr.. Kingsley fears that the word sec
ton" in this language is confined TO that
part OF the income tax provision when
refers to the income taxes 10 be LEVIN
upon natural persons and does not reier
to that part of those provisions when
provide for levying income tax upon cor
porations. But he will see that this rear
Is unfounded when he learns, from rear
ing through all the income tax PROVISIONS
that the whole of them constitute Section
III of the entire tax bill. Section | OF thas
bill including the Guties on Imports
Section III attending to the proposed tsA
on sales Of cotton for future delivery
Section " being the administrative sec
ton OF the bill and Section V being tha'
section of the bill which confers upon inc
President power to negotiate reciprocA
trade agreements with foreign nations
Mr.. Kingsley will also find that tn'
word section is never used In the III
come tax provisions to designate any par
ticular part or paragraphs Of those PRIV
visions but is always used to deslsnau
those provisions In their entirety.
Mr.. Kingsley was apparently led into h''
really unfounded fear by the fact tna.
the income tax provisions OF the tax OH
are so heterogeneous and so confused"
arranged that nobody can learn them
from the language In which they are WHY
ten, except through many days OF ven
laborious study.
ALBERT ii. WALKER
New York. Oct. l.. 1919. 49,