The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1917-06-26
TUESDAY, JUNE. 26, i19l7.


4 -. - ~ ~
IN considering the superintendent OF
tha extraordinary ouiden q 0xes In
war dmes certain scieauno principles
are denniteiy estaoisneu:
How Taxos okould De Appertionsd.
az The. burden Of taxes must be
spread 40 far % possible over the
whole community 20 a. to cau,e each
individual to share In the sacrifices &C.
cording to his ability to pay and &C.
cording to his share In the Government
(2) Taxes on consumption, which are
necessArily. borne BIZ tho community Mt
iarre, should b. imposed as far 90 pos-
sibls % articles Of Quasi-luxury rather
than on those of necessity,
(3l Excuses should b imposed a. far
d possible upon commodities In the
hands OF the dnal consumer rather
than ppOn, the, articles which serve pri.
marily ~ raw material Tor further
production.
~ Taxes upon business should be
imposed as far as possible upon net
earnings rather than upon gross re-
eeipts or capital invested.
t0 Taxes upon income which win
necessarily be severe should be both
differentiated and graduated. That Is,
there should be distinction between
earned and uneamed incomes and there
| should be higher rate upon the larger
incomes. 1t Is essential. however, not
to make the income rate SO excessive
a. to lead to evasion, administrative
dimculties. 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
ana reasonable source OF revenue dur
Ing war times. But the principle upon
winch these war-pront taxes are laid
must be equitable IN theory ana easily
caicuiaple In practice.
| The Proposed Income Tax.
| The additional income tax an passed
! hv tho IJouso rim, I'm to . rota of n,
-. sr,,,. a. ~, ,,,,,a.r, y. ~
per .. ms sum u ~ ". ~
tne history OF civihzea society IL must
% rememoereu tnat IL was ohly uitel
the nrst year OF the war tnat Great
Britain increased her income tax 10 the
maximum OF "a per cent ana tnat
even now III the tourth year OF tue war
the income TAX uoes not exceed A<r2
| per cent.
| 1t could easily be shown that tax
with rates on moderate incomes SUD-
stanually less than In Great Britain
and on the larger incomes 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 "a per cent, or ut most to 40
per cent. and that ut the same time 1t
VIII reduce the rate on the smaller M
comes derived from personal or profess
sional earnings.
| u the war continues We shall have 70
depend more and more upon the In
come .s@ ~ 'mPo:'ne esoess.xe ra.es
difficulties which even Great Britain
'has been able to sscars.-' - - w..
Conclusion.
The House bill contains other funda-
mental defects which may be summed
up as follows:
ID 1t pursues an erroneous principle
In imposing retroactive taxes.
(2) 1t selects an unjust and unwork-
able criterion for the excess-profits tax.
C0 1t proceeds to an unheard-of
height In the income tax.
"a 1t imposes uRwarranted burdens
upon the consumption Of the commu-
nifty.
(0 1t Is calculated to throw business
into confusion by levying taxes on gross
receipts instead Of upon commodities.
90 1t falls to make proper use OF
stamp taxes.
90 1t follows an unscientiHc system
| In its fiat rate on imports.