The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-07-31
WHENCE THE REVENUES?
Certain Contributions TO the Govern
ment's support Compared.

To II EDITOR OF THE SUN-Sir: The
Anti-Saloon League convention in At
lantic City adjourned without giving any
official expression as to how the Fed
eral Government could adopt national
prohibition without suffering the loss Of
100000, 900 annual revenues.
Tho leaders of the league announced
that this practical question would be
discussed at the convention and that
practical business men and statesmen
would present workable plans to abolish
the Federal tax on liquors without
Gripping the Government or Imposing
new burdens OF taxation on the people.
So far as the Federal Government is
concerned this question OF revenue Is the
important one. Liquors were long ago
considered legitimate objects of Fedora
taxation. leaving TO the States the rcgu-
lation Of the traffic In them. The Fed
eral Government now receives $3.50. 0O0,-
600 revenue from liquors and IL cannot
dispense with this revenue without re-
trenching In It's expenditures or creating
new taxation to make up the deficit to
be created.
There were practical business men
present. like Ex-Governor Eugene ~.
Foss. who Is a large manufacturer.
served a term In Congress and two terms
as Governor OF Massachusetts,, but Mr..
Foss did not touch on this practical
tNOIlOIlllc question:. senator SneDDAIu
Of Texas. ex-Representative Hobson Of
Alabama. both OF whom have had long
experience In legislation and both earn
est advocates OF larger appropriations
Tor the navy, for river and harbor
work and for large appropriations to
aid agriculture In the South, but while
both are radical prohibitionists neither
suggested a taxation plan to secure
s25O,000, 900 revenues to he wiped out
by national prohibition.
The only suggestion so far made on
this point is from the Rev. l.. a. Baker.
general superintendent of tho league.
Mr.. Baker say In the FEAR Book OF the
league;
The adoption OF the income tax amend.
rnent TO tn. Federal Constitution furnishes
tho answer TO the revenue problem.
That suggestion Is the only one that
has been offered, and * is interesting TO
the people OF New York IN particular
and 20 the large cities o. Industrial
states I'm general. The returns from
the second year Of the Federal income
tax are now o~btainahlc. This tax pro-
duced about $4,000. 600 and failed TO
wipe out the large deficit IN the Treasury.
The people OF the state # New York
contributed s27.62S.766. or more than
onc-third Of this 100000 900, the fnan-
''' 'f'N on : q WV iNIN 10y NOlINIlDlLts
f5.eo0,00 or more thar one-sixth o.
the total. and the three states OF New
York, Pennsylvania and Illinois nearly
$4,000, 600. or more than one-half TIE
total.
on the basis Of wealth, which Is the
bass FOR taxation eVery where, the peo-
pie " New York pay tn rtccn times the
income tax rate 20 the Federal Govern
meut that the people Of Iowa, Kansas,
and other rural and aurfg,t-
tural states paid. This is not spcrula-
ton. IL IS demonstrated by the official
reports OF the Commissioner Of Internal
Revenue and of the Census Office. The
special census report on wealth for 1912
credits New York State with an aggre-
eate wealth amounting TO 25,Oli.l05.-
1928 and q taxable wealth Of s2l.qla,-
e2s.5O7. There was property valued at
S3O9Si76.7l6 exempt from taxation be-
cause II belonged to churches. schools.
charity organizations and to the public
in the form uf property Of the State
and the municipalities. BY the returns
to the Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
The people of New York PAID so1.62s.-
766 tax on their incomes to the Federal
Government. That was equal TO n tax
Of one and three-tenths mills on every
dollar Of taxable wealth In the State
Of New York.
The state Of Iowa has the largest
per capita wealth In the United States
with the exception Of Nevada alone.
The total wealth Of Iowa is given ut
s7,>SN,i5i.2il and the taxable weillh At
S'.i37.0eiS3i, leaving Si3l. 359.377 cx-
empt from taxation. The people Of Iowa
paid to the Federal Government s733.isS
income tax, or less than oue-teuth Of
n mill on each dollar 81 wealth. In
New York the Income tax rate on wealth
vas thirteen times greater than that In
Iowa. and yet the Federal Government
L. pledged to no inequality IA its tax
alton upon the various states Of the
Union. The States Of Kansas. okla
homa, Nebraska, South Carolina, Ala
hamn, Mississippi and Washington were
like Iowa In paying only one-touth OF
n mill on cach dollar Of taxable wealth,
while In North u South Dakota the
rate fell TO nvc-hundJcdths Of 2 mil.
or one-tweuty-ffth IT the rate for New
YORK. The three States ~ New York,
New Jersey and Pennsylvania paid a
rate OF nlnc-tenths OF n mill. while all
New England paid at the rate Of SIX
tenths Of IA mill, with the rate for Massa-
ohusetts eight-tcnths of a mill.
There were inequalities all over the
country, but In the States with large
cities and great industries the rate was
from u To ten times the rate In the
agricultural States.
III inc income TAX is to be the way
TO raise $3.50, 600, 900 to take tho place
of the liquor tax there will have to be
raised 1880, 00O. 900 by this form OF tax
alton, and New York will under the rre5-
cut rate have To pay more han $780,
600 900 "A year as an income tax to the
Federal Government. Il Is a suggestion
OF vital interest to the people Of New
York. II. j. K~ALTENRAcu.
President New York state Whole
sale Liquor Dealers Association.
NEW YORK, July 81.
pIo,.out Exncctotjnus Arnusc1 d, II