New-York tribune., 1920-12-19

lormai lorna set rules of procedure, except
mat 1t will not consider an appeal nm
tll shc income tax unit has rendered
hnai decision, and the appellant has
something definite from which to ap-
peal, and except that any facts up0n
winch the appeal is based must be
succinctly stated in writing and sworn
TO-. The procedure after an appeal is
duly filed is informal, the object of
the committee being to get at the
real facts and the amount of tax right
Y due.
as follows: The appeal in writing.
stating the decision of the unit which
IS objected to and from which appeal
taken may be filed either with the
init Or directly with the committees
secretary In the latter case card
ecord Is made and the income tax unit
lotlfled that an appeal has been taken
nd requested to forward all papers,
! with such memorandum explaining it's
position and the reasons for its action
as 1T cares to submit.
Hearing Is Provided
Upon receipt of the complete file it
Is placed in pending file until such
eAAiS 40 IIcIlDcI Vi Cnc COmmlttep
notifies the secretary that he is ready
to take on more cases. The earliest
ones received are then assigned to
MN, and cursory examination made
TO see II an oral hearing is desired. If
It IS, the secretary makes an appoint
ment by correspondence with the ap-
pellant, suggesting that briefs of his
argument upon the questions raised by
the appeal be filed at least three days
before the hearing.
Ihls Is for the purpose of giving the
member who will hear the case an op-
portunity for preliminary study of
the questions. The unit is also notified
so that the auditor whose conclusions
are questioned may be present, and the
solicitors office if any question of law
seems to be involved After the hear
ing the member carefully studies the
1acts which / ave been brought out and
the law and regulations applicable to
the case, and formulates his conclu
slons in writing in the form Of a pro-
posed committee recommendation.
copies OF this are furnished each of the
other members, and at least once a week.
or oftener if necessary, all members
meet in conference for a consideration
OF the opinions so prepared In these
conferences the facts and treatment of
them are fully discussed, and if the
various members are satisfied that the
recommendations as prepared reach a
proper conclusion they are signed by
the chairman and forwarded to the
commissioner for his approval.
II there are differences Of opinion
these are thrashed out until all can
agree If possible If it is not posi-
oIe 10 reach an unanimous opinion the
majority view prevails, and the opinion
IS sent back if necessary, for rewrit
ing IN accordance with the view held by
the majority.
The questions submitted to the COM
mlttee are, of course, varied. Some
tlmes they are submitted mainly be-
cause the taxpayer is indisposed to paw
the tax demanded until he has exhaust
ed every opportunity of escape by ap-
peailng to the last authority. These
are lew IN number, however. and ordi-
narily each one presents real oues-
ton. Sometimes it is a problem of
correct construction of the law and
populations; sometimes as to the reg,-
lation applicable to particular state
OF 1acts. Most frequently, perhaps, it
is question of the exercise of discre-
.'on or Judgment. 1t must be rcmem-
pered That many times large taxes
nlnge upon questions of fact which are
not capable of positive proof. and az
to which conclusion must be rcached
IN the light of the best evidence OBJ
talnaoie: :,n Upon such questions minds
VIII differ widely. Examples Of th;s
Klnd OF cases are those INVOLVING valu-
at'on OF assets, tangible or intaneible
az the time when paid in for stock
years ago. affecting invested capital
or as OF March i, 1913, when subse-
qIuently sold, involving the extent Of
one proht or loss when sold Other
cases OF This rhov
most numerous and difficult class. are
tnose arising from the disallowance of
d part OF the salaries Of officers claimed
Inc Inc bureau seldom, if ever, questions
salaries paid as the result Of onnn
bargaining between the companv ana
,he officer, II the latter is not a Stock
ho'der, and the question most frequent
~ comes up when the officers own a
etohtrolilng interest and are able to Vote
fnnemseives such salaries as they see Gt
llor 70 1915 the tax on corporations
On ,hdlViduals, and the salary claimed
maze no difference. If the CORPORA.
non claimed a deduction for salarv
pa'n' the recipient paid normal and
surtax on IT.. If profits were distr;hN
uteo as dividends and not in the ru;se
OF salaries the corporation paid tax
ana the recipient paid no normal tax On
~ .ho a"ouHe' Inc government received
the the same amount in either case With
tne coming, OF the excess profits tax
however; all this changed, and in man~ s"~,
cases the advantage of distribmt;nn,
pTohts as salaries was very rrears sas
nance. the necessity of close scrnt,n,
OF salary allowances. '>'o''"y
J, POSSIBLY the most difficult cases n
DISCUSS inteiligently with the taxnavcr
are those where assessment under fhe
,aw n.% Is determined by comparison with
other taxpayers in IA similar linc ~
business, because Of inability To- dstor ~
NINE mi, the Taxpayers true invested cani-
ta'' or because of the existence ~
some OF the other grounds under the
Jaw for such action '"e
N|ho foregoing article 81 based an ~
fpee'~ 9.ven Friday night. by Mr.. Tai. |
Ger cert at the end Of a tar conferencc ot
6oesn.S.r 6eeen,S'n U"fDsr''ty. OAioh began on
sequentlv Do Dri,sted 1. hn.L e""-