The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1920-05-13
Vote No and Save Taxes.


Why Not Graduated Tax on Profits.
The problem of raising the revenue
to meet the bill for the proposed ex-
penditure Of two or three billion dol
lars for soldiers bonuses now con-
fronts congress-. Sundry demagogues
are endeavoring to make the people
believe that some system of taxation
can be devised whereby the people will
not foot the greater part of the bill.
A proposed tax on sales of merchan-
disc is opposed on the ground that it
makes the ultimate consumer the goat,
and that it will only add to the burden
Of high prices already SO heavy.
Why not, instead Of a sales tax, a
graduate sales profits tax?
The much bedamned middle man,
the merchant, the distributor, perform
a definite service to the public. The
theory that they are mere toll takers,
parasites, unnecessary evils, is with
out foundation in common sense. The
very existence of our present system
of merchandising is evidence that
there is demand for it, and the
wholesaler, broker and retail mer-
chant are all necessary links in the
chain Of efficient distribution. But
profteering may properly be penalized
by the government There is reason
able percentage Of profit for the whole
saler, the jobber, and the retail mer-
chant. That reasonable percentage
of profit belongs properly to the man
who performs the service involved in
buying and storing and distributing
merchandise in competitive market.
Upon that proper percentage of
profit no special tax should be levied.
Legitimate business is. already suffer-
ing from discriminat tory taxation
which proceeds on the assumption
that the man who conducts produG
tive enterprise is public enemy whom
the government ought to "trim' at
every opportunity.
Beyond the point Of reasonable and
legitimate and proper profit graduated
taxation should begin. Assume that
the reasonable profit to retailer on
a certain class Of commodities is TWEEN
ty per cent. That percentage is an
ascertainable figure. The man who
charges twenty-five should pay a stiff
tax upon his entire profit; the man
who charges thirty per cent should be
assessed still more heavily, and so
on until the tax becomes practically
confscatory for the constituencies
profiteer.
Such tax would bring to light
facts relative to the profits of every
distributive business which it would
be well for the public to know, and
which would put the fear of God or
Uncle Sam in the heart of. the real
profiteer. twould eliminate distribu-
tive agencies so inefficiently or extrav-
agantly or UNNECESSARILY run that they
can be conducted only upon a system
of plucking the consumer. It would
undoubtedly have tendency to de-,
press prices Of commodities. 1t would
put premium on the enterprise and
efficiency of the man who is able to
serve the public as distributor in an
economical way. It would discourage.
multiplication of distributive agencies
which no longer involve increased
competition because of the tendency to
standardize prices.
It would discourage and penalize
market gambling in foodstufs, because
every speculation could be made sub
ject to profit tax upon the actual
amount invested in the transaction.
Such a tax would meet the objection
of those who say that a sales impost
would merely result in passing on
added costs to the Nation
al Republican.