The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1917-06-11
HQN SRA. N
.PBY FOR THE WARE.
"a G Constructive Criticism on
the House Revenue
Bill.
ny EDWIN r. A. sELIaMAM,

aicvickar Professor Of Political Econ
omy, Columbia University.
y On May %, 1917, the House Of Rep
resentatives passed an act ito provide
revenue to defray war expenses and
for other purposes" In the original
bill as presented by the Committee of
Ways and Means, the additional reye
nue. to be derived was estimated at ST.,
SIC, 10000. The amendment to the In.
come tax, which was tackled on to the
bill during the discussion in the House
was expected to yield another $4,000.
600 or $5o0O0oOo
In discussing the House bill, two
problems arise:
f /. Flow much should be raised BY
taxation?
IL In what manner should this sum
be raised?
I. How Much Should Be Raised BY
Taxation?
Flow was the figure Of $1,S00000000
arrived at? The answer is simple. When
the Secretary OF the Treasury came to
estimate the additional war expenses
for the year 1017-18, he calculated that
they would amount TO some $G,G00,.
100000, of which S3,0Oo,00o,0O0 was to
be allotted to the allies, and $780,.
100000 was to be utilized for the do
nestle purposes Thinking that it
would be a fair proposition to divide
this latter sum between loans and
taxes, he concluded that the amount
to be raised by taxes was $1.SO0O0O,-
900.
There are two extreme theories, each
OF which may be dismissed with scant
courtesy. The one is that all war ex-
penditures should be betrayed by loans,
and the other is that all war expendi-
lures should be betrayed by taxes
Each theory is untenable.
1t is indeed true that the burdens of
the war should be borne by the pres
emit rather than the future generation;
but this does not mean that they should
be borne by this years taxation.
Meeting all war expenses by taxation
makes the taxpayers in one or two
years bear the burden of benefits that
ought to be distributed at least over a
decade within the same generation.
In the second place, when expendi-
lures approach the gigantic sums Of
present-day warfare, the tax-only pol
icy would require more than the total
surplus of social income. We're this
absolutely necessary, the ensuing hav-
&c in the economic life Of the commune
ty would have to be endured. But
where the disasters are so great and
at the same time so unnecessary, the
tax-only policy may be declared I'm
practicable.
Secretary McAdoo had the right in
stinct and highly commendable cour-
age in deciding that substantial por.
ton, at least, Of the revenues should
be derived from taxation. But when
he hit upon the plan OF $3.50 per cent,
that is, Of raising one-half of all do
nestle war expenditures by taxes, the
question arises whether he did not go
too far.
The relative proportion of loans to
ta1es is after all a purely business
proposition. Not to rely to g large ex-
tent on loans at the outset of war is
4 mistake.
Disadvantages Of Excessive Taxes
The disadvantages Of excessive taxes
at the outset Of the war are as follows:
1. Excessive taxes on consumption
win cause popular resentment
2. Excessive taxes on industry will
disarrange business, damp enthusiasm
and restrict the spirit Of enterprise at
the very time when the opposite is
needed
8. Excessive taxes on incomes will de-
plete the surplus available for invest
ments and interfere with the placing of
he enormousIoans which will be neces-
Iary in any event.
4. Excessive taxes on wealth will
cause a serious diminution of the In
ZONES which are at present largely
lrawn upon for the support of educa-
donal and philanthropic enterprises.
Moreover, these sources OF support
would be dried up precisely at the time
when the need would be greatest.
s. Excessive taxation at the outset Of
NE war will reduce the elasticity avail.
lble for the increasing demands that
ire soon 20 como.
Great BritaiHs Policy.
Take Great Britain as an example
During the first year OF the war she
increased taxes only slightly, in order
b keep Industries going at top notch,
During the second year she raised by
lew taxes only per cent. of her war
expenditures. During the third year
he levied by additional taxes lover
md above the pre-war leveD only
lightly more than II per cent, Of her
var expenses.
If we should attempt to do as much
q the first year of the war as Great
Britain did In the third year It would
ufice to raise by taxation S1,2NO00,.
90. If, In order to be absolutely on
he safe side, 1t seemed advisable to
Increase the sum. to S1,5O0.0Oo, 900, this
hould, In our opinion, be the maxi.
mum.
In considering the airport E0nment OF
he extraordinary burden Of taxes in
var times certain scientific principles
kra Definitely nstahlishnd.