The sun., 1919-01-30
LUXURY TAX STIRS
POPULAR PROTEST
Big New York Department
Stores to File Petitions
Against 1t.
CUSTOMERS AS sIGNERs
War Revenue Bill Provisions
Declared to BE Unjust
and Unnecessary.


fore Congress its views on the luxury
tax" provision of the war revenue bill
many of the stores of this city will pre-
sent for the signatures of their patrons
to-day petitions protesting against GER
tain features of the bill and addressed
to those Senators and Representatives
who now have the bill. under cous!dera-
ton in joint conference.
In view of the fact that in the last
analysis the burden of the tax upon
what the bill holds TO be luxuries and
semi-luxuries will fall on the purchasers
It seems proper to the proprietors OF
various stores to enlist the aid OF the
public in protest against some phases
of the bill. All of the stores which have
arranged to request the signatures of
customers to petitions will have the petit
tons exposed near their main entrances.
Among the stores are those of b. Altman
& Co. Wanamaker's McCreery's r. II
Macy & Co, Stern Bros. Bloomingdale
Bros. Best & Co. Saks & Co. and Ba!ch.
Price & Co., Abraham * Strauss and
Losers in Brooklyn.
The petitions will be addressed to Sem
ators F. NJ. Simmons, Hoke Smith. John
Sharp Williams. Boies Penrose and
Henry Cabot Lodge and to Representa-
tives Claude Kitchn. Henry T. Riiney,
Lincoln Dixon. J. Hampton Moore and
James w. Fordney. These Senators and
Representatives are now holding hear
ings and discussions on the war revenue
measure as members of a joint commit
tee which has it in conference.
Objections to the Tax.
The arguments which have been ad-
vanced against the bill are many, but
principally that as the war Is over many
OF its provisions are unnecessary: that
those provisions placing a tax on So
called Injuries and semi-luxuries are
often vague that they are undemocratic
since they constitute a species of class
legislation that the keeping within the
law. II 1t should become operative as
law. will entail a mas Of bookkeeping
costlier than the amount of revenue col
lectible under the law and above ALL
! that\to tax certain articles named in the
bill will do away to n large extent with
their manufacture and sale and withhold
employment in the trades affected from
many men who are now being demobi-
lized from the fighting forces.
The following are only few Of the
articles on which X is proposed 70 i'm
pose tax rs luNuries or semi-,uxuries
Carpets and rugs except imported
and American rugs made principally OF
/ wool, on the amount in excess OF IS
/ a square yard.
Trunks in excess OF $50 each.
Nalises. hand bags. suit cases. hat
boxes and other articles used by travel
lers in excess of s25 each.
Purses, shopping and hand bags and
| pocketbooks in excess of $3.50 each.
| Umbrellas, parasols and sunshades In
excess Of 81 each
| Fans costing more than 81
House and smoking jackets, bath and
lounging robes in exce:s OF $3.50
Mems wa!stcoats sold separately from
suits on the amount Of cost beyond SIS.
Mems shirts costing over SO each.
Riding boots. II for a servant they
are taxable on the total cost II for
| the buyers use on the proportion OF
! the cost above $40.
On all textiles for hangings and fur
I niture and on all articles classed as
antique furniture.
Tax on Liveries.
Liveres and servants uniforms. Tax
on whole cost.
Mems suits and overcoats. except for
military use, on all excess above $50.
Women's suits, cloaks and wraps IN
excess OF $50 and dresses in excess
OF $40.
Mems and boys neckties on all cost
over 50 apiece their silk hose on the
amount over 81: their hats on excess
over 50, and their caps on the excess
above 81 apiece.
Mems shirts on the excess above So
apiece.
on underwear for men, women and
| children, including night clothes, a tax
n =
| on women hats costing more than SIS
The tax upon the articles enumerated
varies according to the article and
| ranges anywhere from TO 30 per cent
| upon the amount of its cost which Is
| made subject TO tax.
! IT was pointed out by a number OF
| business men yesterday that one OF
| their principal objections to the pro-
posed imposition of a tax on the So
| called semi -luXuries is based on the IA CT
| that to collect the tax properly they
| will be Obliged to establish elaborate
| audit departments, costing In the long
| run more money than the amount OF the
tax coilectble in their establishments
1t is to the purchaser however. that
the main argument Is addressed The
purchaser will pay. lie or she will pay
the increased cost due to the tax and
| the increased and, as II Is considered.
result of the tax. Inc customer may
also expect TO have to do without many
| articles which the bill will discourage
manufacturers to produce and to have
! TO put up with some articles which will
| be all he can get because manufacturers
will hesitate TO produce the finer grade
| articles.
They see also considerable unem-
, ployment as a result of the bill, and con-
slider that II will hit hardest Into the
ranks OF soldiers being demobilized,
, many OF them expert craftsmen and with
! every right to expect a return to their
old places In their trades, This. 1t Is
pointed out. amounts to the most in
equitable and unjust feature Of the whole
proposed law.
The following Is the form of the ap-
! peal which VIII be presented for the
/ signatures OF customers at a number of
New York stores to-day:
we. the undersigned, do respectfully
| but emphatically protest against the en-
actment of that part Of the impending
revenue bill known as the luxury taxes
This Is a direct burden upon one class
OF the consuming public. Is contrary to
the democratio principles of this repub-
! lie. and is in the last analysis class leg
| islation."
! The Association OF Retail Clothiers
| and Haberdashers OF New York CITY met
at Delmopico's yesterday and launched
n movement which they expect will de-
velop into a countrywide protest against
! the imposition OF the So-called luxury