The Washington times., 1921-02-27
HARDING GETS
BRYAN ADVICE
Commoner Urges President
Elect to Keep Tax Burdens
on Rich Profiteers.
(contInued from First Page) }

arbiter. and we will have more in
fluence when we reserve the night
to decide our action for ourselves
than we would have IL a foreign
council could commit US to war and
call our soldiers to battle.
DECREE OF THE VOTERS.
Many of those who favored rati-
fication without reservation. as long
as that seemed possible, did so as
did-not because Article X was
deemed wise. but because 1t seemed
better to 10 into the League at once
and eliminate Article X afterward
than to risk the evils that might come
with delay. Now that the American
people have issued their mandate all
will Join the friends Of an Associa-
ton of Nations and hasten the carry
ing out the voters decree.
This is the first problem with
which the new President will have
to deal, and every citizen who has
the welfare of his country at heart
will hope that we will act wisely and,
by throwing our nations influence
on the side of concillation, help to
lay the foundation for an enduring
peace.
The second problem that confronts
the new occupant Of the White House
has to do with taxation. Revenue is
the continuing question in Govern
ment; other questions may come and
go, but taxation, like Tennyson's
Brook, "goes on and on forever" 1t
is more acute now than usual because
of the enormous levies made neces-
sary by the war. The people are
crying out under the burden Of tax
alton, and every important class OF
taxpayers is clamoring for relief.
The lOudest ctamOr, as usual,
comes from those least deserving,
namely, the profteers; but 1t so
happens that this is the class that
has the ear of the public. Repeal
e1cess profits tar" shouts Wal
Street, and the shout is taken up by
every organization under the infa-
ence of the profteers. The cry lOds
so loud that an echo came back from
the Treasury Department and from
the candidates Of the t,oo leading
parties.
The argument relied upon to Sc
cure the repeal is that the tax is
transferred to the consumer
strange argument when it is remem-
bered that the tax is not collected
until after the profiteer has already
collected it from the consumer.
In the year 1921 the protiteers will
give to the Government a part of the
excess which they collected in 1920.
What reason is there to believe that
they would collect less profit If the
tax was removed?
So far as logic can be invoked to
decide the question, the inducement
to excess profits would be greater if
they could keep it all than it is when
they have to give a large percentage
of it to the Government, and yet this
is the argument advanced by those
who seek to relieve the profteer of
this tax
Another argument sometimes
heard is that the excess profits tax
discourages incentive-what incen-
tive? The incentive to collect excess
profits? If so it ought to be dis
couraged. We do not need to en-
courage unfairness in business or the
of society. Ordinary
and reasonable profits are not SUBJ
ject to the excess profits tax-it is
only the unreasonable and illegit-
innate profits upon which the excess
tax is laid.
But, more serious still, how are
we going to support the Government
without enormous revenue? If the
excess profits tax is repealed we
must either make up a great deficit
by some other form of taxation or
suffer a reduction to the extent of
the excess profits tax. Will the tax
payers consent to bear the burden
they now carry in order to release
the least deserving of taxpayers?
Or, as is really demanded, will they
consent to higher imposition upon
themselves in order that the profit
eering may be favored?
The substitute usually suggested
by those who desire to repeal the
excess profits tax is a tax on re-
tail sales which would, OF course,
be paid by the purchaser. No
matter what the profit of the manu-
facturer, wholesaler, jobber and
retailer-after all these have been
added to the original price the Cow
ernment tax would be collected
from the purchaser, leaving the in
termediate profits, whether fair or
unfair, untouched.
CONSUMPTION TAX BURDEN.
A consumption tax over-burdens
the poor and unburdens the rich,
because people do not buy the nec-
essaries Of life in proportion to their
possessions or incomes. 1t takes as
much food to supply the needs of
the poor as Of the rich, and cloth
ing necessary to one is necessary to
the other.
While the rich spend more for
food and clothing than the poor. the
amount spent is not proportionate
to the benefits which they receive
under the protection OF the Govern
mnt. A consumption tax, being
paid out of the income. is. in effect