The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1917-06-21

n.
'ueie should be distinction between
earned and unearned incomes and there
snouio be higher rate upon the larger
incomes 1t is essential. however. not
10 make the income rate so excessive
as 10 lead to evasion. administrators
olinculties, or to the more fundamental
objections which have been urged
above.
10, The excess profits which are due
10 the war constitute the most obvious
ana reasonable source of revenue dur.
ing war times. But the principle upon
which these war-prof,t taxes ara ia,d
must be equitable In theory and easily
calculable In practice.
The Proposed Income Tax.
Inc additional income tax as passed
by the House runs up to rate of 60
per cent. This is sum unheari OF In
tne history OF civilized society. 1t must
oe remembered that 1t 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 42Is
per cent.
IL could easily be shown that a tax
with rates on moderate incomes sub
stanually less than In Great Britain.
and ON the larger incomes about as
nigh, would yield only slightly less than
the 1852, 100000 originally estimated In
the House bill.
II Is to be hoped that the Senate will
reduce the total rate on the highest In
comes to 81 per cent, or at most to 40
per cent, and that at the same time 1t
VIII reduce the rate on the smaller In
comes derived from personal or profess
sional earnings
IT the war continues we shall have to
depend more and more upon the In.
come tax. BY imposing excessive rates
now we are not only endangering the
future, but are inviting all manner Of
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: AAs
~ 1t pursues an erroneous principle
In imposing retroactive taxes.
(2) 1t selects an unjust and unwork-
able criterion for the excess-profits tax.
(3 1t proceeds to an unheard- of
height I'm the income tax
a. 1t imposes unwarranted burdens
upon the consumption of the commu-
nifty.
% 1t is calculated to throw business
into confusion by levying taxes ON gross
receipts instead of upon commodities.
60 1t fails to make proper use of
stamp taxes.
II 60 1t follows an unscientific system
in Its fat rate ON imports
81 1t 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;
~ The amount of new taxation
should be limited to $1,250,0 ,000--or
. at the outset to $1,500000 600 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.
. (2) The excess-profits tax based upon
. q sound system ought to yield about
$500,000,000.
81 The income-tax schedule ought tt
be revised with lowering of the rates
on earned incomes below $4,000, and
with an analogous lowering of the
rates on the higher incomes, 50 as moi
to exceed "a per cent A careful cal
culation shows that an income tax Of
this kind would yield some s450.OO0.
600 additional.
IA The tax on whisky and tobacco
ought to remain approximately as 1t is
with a yield of about $230,000,000.
These three taxes, together with tht
stamp tax at even the low rate of thu
House bill, and with an improved au
tomobile tax, will yield over $3.50,
100000. which is the amount of money
thought desirable
The above program would be in har
mony with an approved scientific sys
TEN. 1t will do away with almost al
of the complaints that are being urget
against the present. 1t will refrain
from taxing the consumption of thu
poor.
1t will throw far heavier burder
upon the rich, but will not go to thu
extremes of confscation. 1t will OBJ
yiate interference with business ant
will keep unimpaired the social pro
ductivity of the community.
1t will establish a just balance be
tween loans and taxes and will no
succumb to the danger of approaching
either the tax-only policy or the loan
only policy Above all. it will Keel
an undisturbed elastic margin. which
must be more and more heavily draw