The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1921-12-14
OLD GUARD BALKED ON BIG TAX
CUTS OR BIG INCREASES.

h. u
CUTS CIR BIG INCREASES.
Senator Hitchcock, of Nebraska, in
the following analysis, showed how the
reactionary republicans attempted to
favor the possessors of large incomes
and discriminate against the small in
come taxpayer, and how the democrats
and western republicans cut in half the
reductions made on the big incomes:
As reported by the committee. this
so-ca1led tax reduction bill proposed
a reduction of so year on incomes of
$4,000 a year, and, of course, on in
comes of less than $4,000 a year the
reductions We're still more significant.
On incomes of $4,000 a year the
committee proposed a reduction in the
tax amounting to $3.50. That, also, is
not a great reduction.
On an income OF $780, 900 a year,
however, the committee proposed to
reduce to tax $3.50. Now we begin to
see the reduction cut some important
figure for the relief of men enjoying
large incomes.
On an income of s1500oo a year the
committee proposed to reduce the tax
progression in the RELIEF afforded to
men Of large incomes.
Reaching an Income of 100000 a
year the finance committee proposed
to the senate reduction of $24,370.
That is to say man enjoying an
income Of 100000 a year was to be
given relief to the extent OF s24.37o in
the tax that he had been heretofore
paying.
When we reach man with an in
come of half million dollars a year
we find that the head of the finance
committee and the republican man
ayers of the senate proposed to reduce
his taxes $114.730 a year.
When we reach the citizen who has
an income of million dollars a year
we find that it was proposed to give
him relief from taxation to the extent
of $274,7So,
am not going further than the man
with an income OF s5,0o0,000 a year.
There are a. good many men who have
larger incomes than $4,000, 900, but in
the case OF every man having an in
come of So 900, 600 a year this commit
tee, inostensib1y carrying out the
pledge of tax reduction for the country,
proposed to reduce the taxes of that
man with an income of s5,000,000 a year
to the extent of $1,594.730 a year.
That is what the committee proposed
and that is what would have been ac-
complished in the senate had it not
been for the determined fight made by
the democratic senators upon this side
of the aisle, assisted as it was by a
number of republicans upon the other
side of the aisle who felt that it would
be an outrage upon the country to
perform a pledge of tax reduction by
giving the relief almost entirely to men
the greatest incomes of the
In contrast to that, let me show what
was actually done here in the senate
as result of this cooperation Between
the solid. democratic vote of the senate
and the small number Of republicans
on the other side of the aisle who voted
with US to bring about greater equality
and reduce the proposed favoritisEn.
On the income of the man having
SIC, 600 a year, the result of the senate
debate was to deave the reduction as
it had been placed by the committee at
$40
ON the income of the man having
$40, 600 a year, the result of the strug-
gle in the senate was to defeat the
Of the committee to give him
4 reduction of $3.50, and he was given
/ reduction Of $1,240.
On the income of the man reaching
$3.50, 600 year, the result OF the ssrug
gle here in the senate was to give him
4 reduction of 4,O4o. instead of as pro-
posed by the committee, s12.730
On the income Of a man amounting
10 100000 year, the result of the
struggle here in the senate. was to give
him a reduction in taxes OF $4,000 in
stead of s24,37o.
On the income of a man amounting
% 100000 a year. the result OF the
struggle here in the senate was to give
lin a reduction OF $4,000 a year in
axes, instead OF reduction of STA
80. as proposed by the finance COM
nittee.
On the income Of man amounting
o $1,000, 600 year, the result of the
lebate and struggle here in the senate, |
vas 10 give him a reduction Of $4,000 |
n his taxes instead Of. as proposed by |
he committee. S274.730
On the income of a man amounting /
o S5,000,000 a year, whereas the COM /
nittee had proposed 70 give him an |
-batement Of his taxes amounting TO
], sac, 730 the result Of the struggle +
ere IN the senate, was that this reduc- /
ion was made $4,000 a year.
In ohtre words the result OF that +
truggle here in the senate was prac-
icadly to cut in half the proposed re-
uctions which had been given on the
axes Of great incomes. and 10 save
hat much at least to the government
rom those who could we'll afford 10
Az what they have been herefofore
aging.