The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1917-06-21
In considering the apportlonment W

In considering the apportionmenr W
the extraordinary burden Of taxes Ii
war times certain scientific principles
are definitely established:
How Taxes Should Be Apportioned.
N The burden Of taxes must be
spread as far as possible over the
whole community so as to cause each
individual to share in the sacrifices az
cording to his ability to pay and ac-
cording to his share in the Government
(2) Taxes Oh consumption. which ure
necessarily borne by the community at
large. should be imposed as far as pos
sible on articles Of quasi-luxury rather
than on these Of necessity.
81 Excises should be imposed as far
rs possible upon commodities in the
hands of the final consumer rather
than upon the articles which serve pri-
marily as raw material for further
production.
AZ Taxes upon business should be
imposed as far as possible upon net
earnings rather than upon gross re-
ceipts or capital invested.
o. Taxes upon income which will
necessarily be severe should be both
differentiated and graduated. That is.
there should BE- distinction between
earned and unearned incomes and there
should be higher rate upon the larger
incomes. 1t is essential. however. not
to make the income rate so excessive
as to lead to evasion, administrative
difficulties, or to the more fundamental
objections which have been urged
above.
(6 The excess profits which are due
to the war constitute the most obvious
and reasonable source Of revenue dur
ing war times. But the principle upon
which these war-profit taxes are laid
must be equitable in theory and easily
calculable in practice.
The Proposed Income Tax.
The additional income tax as passed
by the House runs up to a rate Of 90
per cent. This 10 a sum unheard Of IN
the history Of civilized society. 1t must
be remembered that it was only after
the first year OF the war that Great
Britain increased her income tax to the
maximum Of "a per cent. and that
even now in the fourth year Of the war
the income tax does not exceed 421s
per cent.
1t could easily be shown that tax
with rates on moderate incomes sub
stantially less than in Great Britain.
and on the larger income about as
high, would yield only slightly less than
the $3.50. 100000 originally estimated in
the House bill.
1t is to be hoped that the Senate will
reduce the total rate on the highest In
comes to "t per cent. or at most to 40
per cent. and that at the same time 1t
will reduce the rate on the smaller in
comes derived from personal or profess
sional earnings.
II the war continues we shall have to
depend more and more upon the in.
como tax. BY imposing excessive rates
now we are not only endanserina the
future, but are inviting all manner ct
difficulties which even Great Britain
has been able to escape.
Conclusion.
The House bill contains other funda-
mental defects which may be summed
up as follows:
% 1t pursues an erroneous principle
in imposing retroactive taxes.
(2) It selects an unjust and unwork-
able criterion for the excess-profts tax.
e. 1t proceeds to an unheard-of
height in the income tax.
(4) It imposes unwarranted burdens
upon the consumption Of the commu-
nifty.
90 It is calculated to throw business
into confusion by levying taxes on gross
receipts instead Of upon commodities.
(6) 1t fails to make proper use OF
stamp taxes.
O 1t follows an unscientidc system
in its fat rate on imports.
(S) It includes multiplicity OF pet
ty and unlucrative taxes, the vexatious-
ness Of which is out Of all proportion to
the revenue they produce.
-
The fundamental lines on which the
House bill should be modified are sum.
med up herewith:
1) The amount of new taxation
should he limited to $3.50, 900 yOOO-or
at the outset to 81, ,5OO,OO0,0O0. To do
more than this would be as unwise as
it is unnecessary. To do even this
would be to do more than has ever
been done by any civilized Govern
ment in time OF stress.
e, The excess-profts tax based upon
sound system ought to yield about
$500. 100000.
(3> The income-taX schedule ought to
be revised with lowering Of the rates
on earned incomes below $4,000, and
with all analogous lowering Of the
rates on the higher incomes, so as not
to exceed 81 per cent. A careful cal
culation shows that On income tax OF
this kind would yield some $45O.OOO