Evening star., 1943-05-07
uxes
Continued From First Page

per cent OF taxes.
Mr.. STAN appeared before the
Senate Finance Committee in a
brief public meeting preceding a
closed session at which advocates
hoped to force showdown on the
question Of substituting a version
of the Ruml-Carlson "skip-a-tax-
year" plan for the House-approved
bill.
The congressional tax expert told
the committee that the House bill
which would wipe out the first 6 per
cent normal tax and the 13 per cent
first bracket surtax and put into
effect 20 per cent withholding levy
on wages and salaries, would cost
almost as much as complete for
giveness" of 1912 taxes, as proposed
In the Ruml- Carlson plan.
60 Per Cent Would Resent Plan.
Mr.. STAN said abatement under
the House bill would eliminate 1912
tax liability for a single person with
no dependents whose income did
not exceed $4,000 and a married
person, with no dependents, whose
net earnings did not exceed $4,000
Those with dependency allowances
could make more and still have all
Of their 1912 tax excused.
Above these levels, however. he
said are "a per cent of the tax
payers who paid about 50 per cent
Of the total of income taxes. He
added that they would not be placed
on current basis and would have
to make two complicated tax re-
turns yearly.
These taxpayers will resent being
required to make computations for
two separate years when they are
not being put on current basis
and since they pay about 60 per cent
OF the tax. I think their complaints
might be given some weight" Mr.
Siam declared.
Senator Vandenberg, Republican
OF Michigan, said he saw no reason
why committee vote on taxes
could not be had this afternoon.
Il think the answer will be written
around the Ruml- Carlson bill" Sen
ator Vandenberg told reporters.
This measure, harpooned sharply
by Randolph Paul, Treasury general
counsel, at yesterdays initial hear
Ing, is credited by advocates with
having the support of at least a
dozen Of the 81 committee members.
Hope for Democratic Support.
In addition to eight Republicans,
proponents said they counted on
the votes of Democratic Senators
Clark of Missouri, Gerry of Rhode
Island, Radcliffe Of Maryland and
Lucas of Illinois. In addition, they
said they felt they might obtain the
support of Senator Walsh, Democrat,
of Massachusetts,.
Chairman George already has
made the paramount issue clear in
declaring the committee must decide
how much it wants the Treasury to
lose" to get taxpayers on a current
basis.
Ruml- Carlson plan supporters
contend there will be no loss in i'm
mediate revenues and little through
out the years, but Mr.. Paul said that
$8,319, ,000, 900 in levies would go down
the drain.
The Ruml- plan would
abate the 1912 tax of every one
whose income is less than $1,000,
apply payments already made on
the 1912 liability to the first half Of
ls43, and put these taxpayers on a
current basis. Like the House-ap
proved bill, it would impose 20 per
cent levy, starting July /. on wages
and salaries to enforce the "pay-as-
you-go' principle.
But there was sharp dissension
within the committee on the So
called "windfall" provisions of the
Ruml-C Carlson bill-provisions in
serted in an effort to keep war con-
tract brokers and others with bur-
geoning war incomes from getting
an abatement all out OF proportion
to their normal earnings.
Some Taxes Above Earnings.
Under the Carlson bill persons
with more than 5000 income In
1912 would get an abatement OF
either 1912 or 1943 tax, whichever is
lower. But another provision would
compare both the 1912 and 1943 in
comes with 1910 earnings, and II
they both were more than $4,000
higher than the 1910 level, the tax
payer would have added to his l94a
liability the regular tax on the Diff
ference.
While the taxpayer could pay this
excess IN three years, Senator Byrd
Democrat, of Virginia contended
and Treasury experts agreed, that
many taxpayers would be required
to pay in 1943 more taxes than the
amount they actually received ir
income.