Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1915-11-01
DRUG SPEC|ALT|ES
MAY COST MORE
Manufacturers of Perfumery,
Hair Tonics, Etc., to Fight
War Revenue.
CAN FORCE RETAILERS
TO BEAR TAX BURDEN
Makers of Articles for Household
and Personal Use Organizing to
Appeal to Congress.

0ppCdA W SUA6ASoss
Manufacturers all over tn. United
States who produce perfumery, dent-
frices, talcum powders, hair tonics, etc,
are preparing for a descent in force
upon Congress as soon as that body
convenes, In an endeavor to obtain
some alteration Of the present emer-
gency war revenue act, which the SEQ
rotary of the Treasury recently an
nounced 1t will be necessary to extend
further than its present expiration
period, December 81, 1915.
The manufacturers now are organic
ing for this purpose, and they declare
they will no longer bear the burden of
this tax on their business. The result
may be that druggists, department
stores and other retailers of these ar
ticles of daily household and personal
use will be forced to bear the burden
of the tax, or that the retailers, in
turn, will force the tax upon the con-
sumers.
Necessities May Cost More.
Now that sanitation and hygiene
are practiced SO extensively in the
home. cold creams, mouth washes,
deodorants and other similar necessi-
ties of modern civilized life such as
those mentioned above may cost more.
The manufacturers have so far borne
the burden of the tax. but they are
getting ready to fight the provisions
of the law which throw the burden
upon them, and have today caused to
be distributed to dealers in the ar
tlcleS statement
contains these words:
IF the tax is reimposed at the COM
ing session of Congress, we shall have
to determine for ourselves Individual
ly the eXpediency and necessity, as n
measure of self-preservation, of pass
ing the burden along to the retailer.
who. it is hoped, will find a way to
combat or escape the severity of the
tax
The manufacturers of these goods do
business estimated at s7,000,O0O a
year. This does not include chewing
gum, but chewing gum, which is one
of the largest industries of the United
States, is included in schedule B" of
one of the three largest chewing gum
manufacturing concerns of the country
has paid into the United States Treas
ury for stamps, under the emergency
tax act, so far, the sum of 100000, so
it is safe to assume, it is said. that the
port the other manufacturers in their
coming representations to Congress.
Not Luxuries, They Claim.
The argument of the manufacturers
is that the way the payment of the tax
has worked out Is contrary to the ex-
press intent of the authors of the tax
measure. They claim that Congress
intended to place the tax on consumers
Of luxuries, such as perfumeries. and
that it was never intended either that
the manufacturers should pay the tax
on perfumery or that they should pay
1t on such household necessities as de-
odorants, tooth pastes, talcum pow
ders, etc. The manufacturers claim
that articles such as the latter should
not be classed as Injuries.
The tax consists of one-eighth of a
cent on a five-cent article. and multi
pies accordingly. The manufacturers
claim this amounts to 21s per cent. On
the manufacturers average selling
price of 81. cents for a five-cent arti-
Gle, they say, the tax they are Obliged
to pay is per cent. They point out,
also, what they claim are Inequalities.
For instance. they say, an article re-
failing at 35 cents must bear a tax
stamp of IA cents, which Is the same
tax that a fifty-cent article must pay.
A sixty-cent article must be stamped
cent article must be stamped. These,
they charge, are injusticeS.
Pay Five Separate Taxes.
Alcohol is used to large extent in
the business of these manufacturers,
and they point out that they pay a
separate tax of 700 per cent on that
raw material; that they also pay a 20
per cent tariff on imported raw ma
terials; that they pay an income tax
and a corporation tax, all in addition
to the emergency war revenue tax.
The manufacturers realize that the
small amounts of the emergency tax
cannot very well be passed on to the
consumer by them, inasmuch as this
tax is in fractions of cent-such as
one-eighth, one-quarter or one-half of
a cent.
They are, therefore, discussing the
possibility of adding the taxes to the
retailers prices, and letting them fight
it out with the consumers.
The manufacturers figure that the tax
is per cent on the wholesale prices of
their goods. and they point out that if
one of them does business of. say
100000 a year, on which he earns a
net profit of 10 per cent, the tax
amounts to the government stepping
in and taking half of the net profits,
or $4,000.
They point out. also. that II for any
reason a business has been conducted
at a loss the government nevertheless
exacts the tribute
Retail druggists associations, manu-
featuring perfumery associations, bar
Der supply associations, fiavoring ex-
tract makers associations and other
similar organizations all over the
country are preparing for an attack
its payment has worked out. One of the
chief complaints is that deodorants ha r
tonics, tooth pastes, etc, are no longer
luxurtes, but are articles of common
household and personal use. while there
are many actual luXuries, BOUGHT o "
by the wealthy, which are untaxed
under the emergency war revenue act