The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1920-11-09
Us. DEMANDS
TAX REVISION
CIamor Certain to Produce
Changes in Fiscal Laws,
/. Say Expert.
BY JOHN SNURE.

A great outcry is arising the coun-
try over for revision OF the tax laws
at the coming session OF Congress.
Business men and business con-
Germs OF all kinds are ciamoring for
. an overhauling of the fiscal legisla-
tion and already are beginning to
flood members of the House and
Senate with their demands for
prompt action.
SUPPORT IN CONGRESS.
In both houses of Congress and as
q result the tax question may be
, forced to the front quickly when the
short session opens.
Repeal of the excess profits tax
is the particular thing that business
men are insiting on. They denounce
the exiting law as burdensome and
a handicap to business. They insist
il does not help the consumer but
on the contrary say the tax is finally
visited on him.
Serving to thrust the tax question
still more prominently to the fore is
the announcement that Secretary of
the Treasury Houston Is expected to
u
ing $4,000. 100000. or $4,O00,OOO, 900. a
year, before Congress. This program
contemplates the repeal OF the excess
profits tax and changes in the in
come tax law so that the amount
which would otherwise be raised by
the excess profits tax would come
from incomes above $4,000.
OPPOSITION LOOMS.
This proposition Is sure to stir up
a hornets nest and to meet opposi-
ton. AS a matter of fact, many Of
the men who are decrying the excess
profits, tax will not be at all pleased
over an increased income tax.
Among some OF the business men,
there Is advocacy of a tax on gross
sales A TURNOVER tax. whereby each
turnover of goods or products would
be taxed, Is also advocated in some
quarters.
1t will be remembered that Cover
nor Cox in the course of the campaign
said he was opposed to consumption
taxes. and, in place Of the excess
profits tax urged a IL per cent.
tax on gross business. This met with
some commentator, but also met
with criticism. 1t was attacked by
its critics on the ground that 1t was
really a consumption tax.
Many RepuDllcan leaueTS CrltlCISeu
It and said 1t would fall heavily on
the consumer. They illustrated it by
taking up the case of the man who
wanted to build a house, and pointed
out that he would pay a. whole string
of taxes of IL per cent before he got
hfs house built
REASONS FOR CHANGE.
So now, after the campaign is over.
1t will not be easy for many Of the
Republicans in the House and Sem
ate to take up with anything like
tax on sales or total business done.
A strong reason why the tax laws
should be overhauled in the coming
session, business men say, Is that they
do not want to pay taxes next year
under the existing laws. The first in
stallment, II the laws remain as they
ara will be due March Is. Unless the
laws are changed in the short session
this winter business men will have to
go ahead and pay on the basis of the
since the first installment would be
due before there could possibly be
revision of the tax laws in the spe-
cial session next spring.
Senator McCumber of North Da-
kota, who is here and who will act
as chairman of the Senate Finance
Committee while Senator Penrose Is
i'll, is in favor of revising the tax
laws at once. He wants the excess
profits tax repealed.
But while there will be much sup
port for this idea, some Republicans