Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1922-06-29
u. S. Government Given Of
ficiaI Assurance That Cit
izens' Realty Held Here
Will Not Be Confiscated
BY DAVID LAWRENCE
(Leased Wire Service to The Journal
ICnrYrinhf 1000

Copyright. 1929
WASHINGTON, June 27.-Ger
many has given United States gov
eminent official assurances that no
confiscatory taxes will be levied upon
the property returned to German
citizens by the alien property custo-
dian here.
The German government realizes
that If existing statutes were liter
ally interpreted it might mean that
the property Of Germans seized here
during the war would find its way
into the hands Of the Berlin govern
ment and eventually would be part
payment to the allies on the war in
demnity. This fact, more than any.
thing else, has deferred American
officials from recommending the re-
turn Of the German property to their
owners, it being argued that While
the American government may have
sentimental objections to conf1scat-
ing private property, the same prop
erty would be confiscated anyhow by
the German authorities.
Publication in the United States OF
this argument led the German gov.
eminent to take up the question in
an effort to persuade the United
States government that Germany
would not conf1scate the property
The department Of finance in Der
lin has examined the laws and issued
ruling to the effect that the taxes
may be paid in the present value OF
German marks. This makes all the
difference in the world, for II the
two German tax laws were adopted
in July, 1919, and December, 1919, re-
spectively, and in the former case
the value of the mark was thirteen
to a dollar and in the latter forty
nine to a dollar.
If taxes were to be paid on that
valuation it would mean virtual con-
fiscation. But the German govern
mer.t officially advises the United
States that it has no intention or
applying the value Of the mark as
OF July or December, 1919, but only
as Of the date on which the prop
erty is returned. According to the
statisticians Of the German finance
der artment the tax would in no case
go beyond 10 per cent, and in many
cases where the property returned
is of relative small size the tax
would range from 2 to 4 per cent.
These taxes, it is admitted, are high,
bur they do not mean the taking of
the whole thing as was supposed
would be the case if the tax laws
were interpreted as the American
government thought. 81
The German government is nat
urally interested in seeing the prop.
erty of it's nationals restored, and
was quick to point out that fears
of ccnfiscation by the Berlin authori-
ties need not be entertained. The
United States government had, Of
course, no power to intervene as be.
| tween German citizens and the Ger
| man government, though the good
offices of the department of state
| were frequently suggested as u
means of preventing German con-
fiscation. Instead the German gov
ernment has voluntarily interpreted
| its laws of 1919, and made it clear
that it will not penaliZe it's nationals
simply because the difference be-
ween exchange rate today, and three
years ago is so large.
This action will make it difficult
for congress to withhold approval
Of President Harding's plan on that
ground, though it is anticipated a
lively fight will ensue in both the
senate and the house on the ques
ton Of paying American citizens the
claims they hold against Germany
for acts committed during the war
The adjustment Of these claims
| which will be taken up by a mixed
commission may be sought before
the alderman property is returned
The present plan contemplates re-
turning individual properties up to
trust tu ST. ap Pr ely $3.50 600 900 to to
| $450, 100000 other properties of Ger
man ownership pending further de
velopments in American policy.