Evening star., 1943-02-17
WEDNESDAY,
Slim Arguments

Al Is Souno pOllcy TO keep remind
ing income taxpayers that their first
payments are due on March IS.
Nothing is apt to happen between
now and then to change that.
There are more taxpayers this year
tnan last and the filing of returns is
running SO per cent behind normal.
No doubt many of these people have
postponed filing their returns. wait
ing to see what would happen. But
to blame their tardiness on con
fusion" over the Ruml plan is merely
another manifestation of the Treas
urys hostility to sensible proposal.
The real source of worry to the
Treasury should be the number of
tax defaulterS with whom it must
zeal after March 15-defaulters
among the millions of new income
taxpayers who are as yet unconscious
OF the extent of their debt to the
government on what they earned
last year and who have made no
plans to pay it. These are the people
who will be confuSed-not the nor
mally far-sighted individuals who in
past years have made a practice of
Hing their returns early.
The real source of worry to the
people, on the other hand, should be
the Treasury'S bitter criticism of the
Ruml plan, together with it's failure
to put forward any logical basis for
lts opposition. 1t is the Treasury's
outy TO oppose plan that would in
Jure the interests of the Nation
either as collector of internal reve-
nue. or as payer of taxes. But the
lreaSury's opposition in this case is
not convincing. There is a repeated
tendency to omit factual discussion
IN favor Of the sort of demagogic
appeals that on more than one occa-
sion have characterized its tax poll
cies.
In arguing that the Ruml plan
would favor the "millionaires" at the
expense of the poor man, for in
stance, Treasury Counsel Randolph
Paul does not present a complete or
an accurate picture. He overlooks
the proposals to get at the wind
falls" which the early death of
wealthy men might cause, and he
bases his whole argument on a con-
ceptlon of the Ruml plan as for
giving" a year of taxes, which in
Itself is a distortion of the Runl
principle. The rich man pays more
taxes than the poor man, and he is
more heavily in debt to the Govern
ment than the poor man. But his
proportionate benefit from the Ruml
plan is no greater than that of the
man in the lowest bracket.
Nor is Mr.. Paul clear in his con-
tention that the Ruml plan will mean
that tax collections can be increased
only by taxrate increases" shifting
the burden from the few to the MANY.
The Ruml plan would increase tax
collections, according to those who
have testified in its favor. 1t has
nothing to do with the distribution
OF the tax burden and it is highly
misleading to contend that it has.
What it does do is to transfer the
assessment of taxes from last years
to this years income.
But it is when Mr.. Paul contends
that the Ruml plan would "injure
the morale Of the armed forces" that
he really gives his fancy full play.
The soldier in the Army today is in
many cases in debt to the Govern
ment for the substantial income he
earned last year. He has no way of
paying that debt from his present
Income. And after the war, when
the Government tries to collect it, it
will be more difficult than it ever was
for him to pay it, No single class of
people would benefit so much from
the Ruml plan as would the armed
forces and one of the mysteries Of
the Treasury'S attitude is its attempt
to contend otherwise.