Evening star., 1921-09-29
Editorial Digest
Tax Murmur. Grow Audible.

With Congress back on the job the
popular demand for tax revision
now" is becoming distinctly audible
through the press. Because OF the
need for immediate relief. the Senate
bill. as reported by the finance COM
mittee. meets with little approval
from editorial writers, since 1t re-
tains the provision passed by the
House to repeal the excess profits tax
as of January /, 1922, Instead Of jan
uary l. 1921, as urged by practically
all newspapers. The delay OF a year
in getting rid Of this war tax Is at
tackled by papers of both parties
many of which regard it as wholly
political maneuver; some go so far as
to declare it a reputation of the
platform, promise of "eariy ano
"real" reduction of taxes.
THE period of waiting to learn
what the Administrations tax Iolicy
Is to be has been more than long
enough, SO far as the country's busi-
ness Is concerned" declares the Man
chester Union independent repuo-
lican), and the public's position that
taxation must be revised is "one
which Congress cannot AFFORD to ig-
more" The Wilmington IN. c. star
tdemocratic) finds announcement In
| the reports from Washington that
members Of Congress have returned
with the conviction that the people
back home are more Interested IN
the quick passage Of an intelllgent
| tax bill than in any other penang
matter" and II the recess results In
| Concentration on this most i'm
portant matter 'it will have been
, more than worth while.
| The country .'is decidedly in ear
| nest" the New York World tdelno-
1syDl
be relieved OF very substantial
measure of war taxation. and it Will
have no stomach for a play of par
| tisan politics in Congress over any
phase of the question. and furtnsr,
the Chicago News Independently de,
| clares, business and unemployed
| labor demand relief now.
| While "it is too early to speak del
initely of the possible virtues or
| vices' of the bill now before the
| Senate. the New Haven Journal
| Courier independently finds that the
ant one." since from the evidence ~
looks as if political considerations
! had weighed more with the commit
tee than economic To those who
| "were looking to the Senate to bring
early relief for business step
pointment." the New York Post tin-
dependenD thinks. Apparently un-
| der the influence of the farmer-labor
| bloc" as the New York Times Gnde-
pendent democratic) sees 1t. the com
mittee took counsel of fears rather
than of principles, and the result is
condemned by a chorus irrespective
of party" Although it is reported
that Secretary Melons recommenda-
| tion for the retroactive repeal or the
! excess profits tax was favored by 2
| majority of the Senate committee.
| the Times continues. they yielded to
representations coming from all parts
| of the country for the retention OF
the taxes furnishing wealth and profits
! with the intention OF making them
pay taxes for the relief OF the poor.
| Such action. arising from the FEAR
| of sophistry of dema gogues who try
| to make the people believe that re-,
peal Of the law will benefit the
| moneyed interests. in the opinion OF
the Louisville Courier-Journal demo,
! and ''since the tax is destructive
! one and Congress recognizes It to be
such, the thing to do Is to get rid
| of it .as eXpeditiously as possible.
The Buffalo Express independent
| republican, also suggests that per
kaps the delay was decided upon
| partly because of it's pleasant sound
| in the ears of the proletariat." but it
1 defends the Senate bill on the ground
that radical changes from the House
measure would prODaDiy result IN con-
! ference fights and create the posi-
bility that the much needed tax re-
torn would be delayed too long to be
/ effective for the tax-paying year.
However. in the opinion of the
Newark News independently, the Sen
ate measure lis not reform at all. but
only a modification of a tax system
based in theory on levying taxes upon
presumed ability to pay and
amounts. in effect. to a reputation of
the republican promise of genuine
tax reform" The House bill. the Wall
street Journal independently finds.
was an unscientific compromise. and
the Senate bill sis merely a variation
on that compromise" with the result.
the New York Herald independently
declares, that the tax revision job.
as it stands today. is thoroughly
bad job"
AT worst. the Butte Miner demo-
cratic) derives some satisfaction from
it's belief that "the proposed measure.
as it now stands, appears to be an
improvement over the present law
deduction which it apparently draws
on the theory that ANY change would
De an Improvement" The New York
Tribune (republican) finds. that the
pending measure will lift materially
the tax burden - and at the same
time will give the Treasury a margin
Of safety for refunding financing"