Evening star., 1924-10-26
,lember OF the Associated Press
Taxes and Publicity.


The commissioner shall as soon as
> acticable in each year cause to be
prepared and made available to public
.-ispection, in such manner as he may
determine, in the Office of the collector
in each internal revenue district, and
in such other places as he may deter
mine, lists containing the name and
The post office address of each person
making an income tax return in such
uistrict, together with the amount of
tax paid by such person"
Such is the provision of the law
enacted by Congress at the session
which closed in June last, against the
protest Of President Coolidge and the
Secretary of the Treasury. It was in
distinct departure from the policy pre-
Viously established regarding the
preservation of income tax returns
from public scrutiny, policy adopted
by Congress in the first income tax
the Constitution permitting such a
form of taxation.
The plain purpose of that statute is
to permit public inspection of income
tax returns. 1t controvertS a previous
ly enacted law which forbids the pub
lication of such returns, under severe
penalties for violation. The earlier
statute not being specifically repealed,
a question has arisen regarding the
propriety of newspaper publication of
the returns in view of this failure to
repeal. In the absence of a detinitive
decision publicity has been given by
newspapers generally to portions of
the lists, including the names of the
larger taxpayers, as we'll as those of
some others.
Between the simple opening of the
lists to public scrutiny and the pub
lication of them or selections from
them is merely a question of degree
of publicity. The purpose of the law
is obviously to acQuaint the people
with the amounts that individual tax
payers are paying into the Federal
Treasury. Whether that law be wise
or otherwise, equitable or inequitable,
it stands as the statute and as the
plain purpose Of the legislature.
One of the chief objections to the in
come tax as d means of raising Fed
eral revenues originally advanced was
that it permitted and involved an in
quisitorial scrutiny of the private af-
fairs of the individual citizen and the
possibility of a disclosure to all and
sundry of his intimate, personal busi-
ness activities. Against this objection
the income tax was established. 1t has
become a fixed and probably per-
manent means of Government rev.
enue. Not until this present year, how
ever, has Congress gone so far in its
exercise of the taxing power as to re-
quire publicity for the tax returns.
To the publicity provision of the
present law there is a strong, reason
able objection. If the matter were put
to a vote of the people it would prob
ably be the country's decree that the
tax returns should not be laid open to
inspection and publication.
Repeal of the publicity clause in the
law has Undoubtedly been in the minds
Of many members of Congress. The
administrative officers of the Govern
ment, however, could not with pro-
priety or legality postpone or prevent
publicity of the returns in the hope
and expectation that the law would
be so changed. To do so would be to
invite severe and warranted criticism
for neglect of duty. The fact that the
lists have been thrown open to public
inspection so shortly before the cleo
ton may have a political meaning.
This time may have been chosen for
the sake of the greatest possible ef-
feet upon the public mind, in demon
stration Of the need of corrective legis-
lation. Or the lists may have been,
indeed, it is stated that they have
been, opened to public inspection as
quickly as they could be prepared for
that purpose.
Partisan criticism Of the Secretary
of the Treasury comes as a matter of
course. This criticism includes the
fact of the law itself, for which the
head of the Treasury Department is,
of course, in no sense or degree re-
sponsible. 1t includes the doubt that
has arisen as to the propriety and
right Of newspaper publication, for
which again he cannot be held ac-
countable, in view of the fact that
Congress has bungled in its methods
of enactment.
The law is bad. It should be re-
pealed. 1t cannot be repealed too soon
for the good Of the national com.
munity, for the sake of the Govern
ment and for the rehabilitation of
Congress in the public esteem as a
wise body of law makers.
No amount of emphasis in designat-