Evening star., 1943-03-30
The Tax Issue

locked in debate over the so-called
pay -as-you-go income tax bill. The
issue has been joined between the
Carlson bill, based on the Ruml plan
TO apply taxes paid in 1943 to 1943
income, and the Ways and Means
Committee bill, which insists upon
the payment this year of taxes on
1912 income, but authorizes pay
ment also of taxes on 1943 income.
Unoer the Carlson bill tax payments
on 1912 income would be eliminated
forgiven"
The outcome is in doubt. So much
so that it has been strongly limited
that the administration forces now
backing the committee bill will
finally 60 to compromise. That
compromise may take the form of
the Robertson plan, which has been
incorporated in a substitute bill Of
fered by Representative Forand of
Rhode Island. Democrat.
The difference between the Carlson
bill and the Forand bill lies in the
fact that the former eliminates 1912
income taxes for all of the A, ,OO0,O 900
taxpayers and the latter eliminates
1912 income taxes for 80 per cent of
them, those with incomes up to
$4,000. For the rest, the Forand bill
eliminates or forgives the per cent
normal tax and the first 13 per cent
surtax bracket on 1912 income. Under
the Carlson bill, the total forgiveness
of taxes would be 100000 900, and
under the Forand bill, the total for
given would be $7,5OO,OOO 900.
Chairman Doughton of the Ways
and Means Committee and other
supporters of the committee bill have
heaped denunciation upon the plan
to forgive" the taxes on 1912 in
come-although that appears to be
the only way to get the taxpayers on
a pay-as-yougo basis. They have
insisted that to forgive these tax
payments would be immoral" that
1t would break the morale of the
fighting forces and of the whole peo-
pie. ut is folly to talk about for
giving billions of dollars of tax liza
bilities when our war revenue needs
are so Imperative" Mr.. Doughton
argued.
II 1t is folly to talk of forgiving
$4,000, 100000 under the Carlson
Ruml bill, it is folly also to talk of
forgiving $7,5OO0OO,OOO under the
Forand bill. How can those who have
denounced the Carlson bill justify
themselves in supporting the Forand
bill? The final issue, obviously,
should turn, not on the Carlson and
Forand bills, but on the Carlson and
committee bills, although it may be
that the Forand measure, which has
the backing of President Murray of
the CIO, has greater appeal for the
administration forces in the House.
1t is idle to talk of reduced reve-
nues this year under the Carlson bill
1t has been demonstrated, as far as
it is possible to demonstrate by tax
estimates, that under the Carlson bill
the returns would in all probability
be greater than If income taxes were
paid on 1912 income alone. And how
many taxpayers are likely to accept
the invitation of the committee bill
to pay two years taxes in one year?
What the American people desire
is to get on pay-as-you-go basis
OF settling their income taxes. The
House, therefore, should adopt the
Carlson bill and reject the committee
bill, or send the whole subject back
to the committee in the hope that
some better plan may be devised
The Forand bill is neither one thing
nor the other. 1t is, in final effect,
class legislation of the most discrimi-
mating kind.