Evening star., 1947-06-18

Houses.
For. II Mr.. Truman's message
means anything, it means that he
will not favor tax reduction until
'amany uncertainties" have cleared
up in the world and presumably
after America has poured more bill
lions of Government money into
Europe.
1t means also that the Democratic
Party has taken the position of ap-
proving the Truman argument
which frankly would penalize thrift
and success and level downward all
incomes of successful people so that
salaries paid in the middle and
higher brackets would be confiscated
By higher taxes.
The President said that the Re-
publican-sponsored bill failed "to
give relief where it is most needed y
Then he went on to say that fam
lily with an income of $4,000 would
be given saving of less than $50
while taxes on income of $4,000
would be reduced by nearly $4,000.
He added that the $2.500 family
would get an increase in take
home" pay of only IL per cent while
the family with an income of $50
900 would receive an increase of
1876 per cent.
Discourages Enterprise.
Such an argument coming from
Moscow and Che cleft wingers" of
the world would not be surprising
but to firld Mr.. Truman arguing that
wartime tax rates must be main
tanned permanently throws discour-
agement into the whole group of
enterprising individuals who possess
the minds that create jobs in Amer
lea. Mr.. Truman reveals himself as
a New Dealer and he out t-Roosevelts
the late President.
Never did Mr. Roosevelt defend
abnormally high tax rates in peace
time. In 1889, for instance, the FAM
lily with $4,000 income paid no taxes
at all and the one with $4,000 in
come paid 17.2 per cent in taxes. In
1946, this figure had gone up to 48.3
per cent in taxes on $4,000 in
come. 1t was proposed under the Re
publican bill to make the tax rate
about 1876 per cent, which is still
very high In comparison with 1889.
These figures are based on a family
of four.
Unless Mr.. Truman is planning
to let millions and millions of fami-
lies go back entirely to the 1899
rates-when they paid no taXes-it
would mean that the President in
tends to keep on penalizing and dis
couraging the people in the middle
income brackets.
Even in the family where there
was a $4,000 income in 1899, the
tax rate was only 35 per cent where
as 1t got up to 1877 per cent in 1916.
1t was proposed by the Republican
bill to make it 149 per cent.
Questions for Voters.
These reductions for the persons
in the groups above $2,50o have no
relationship whatsoever to the rates
under $4,000 because these very
rates were changed disproportion-
aVS1y bIlC al SCo1S. AflI
Truman says:
IF H. r. l (the Republican bilD
were to become law, the inequity of
its provisions would be frozen into
the tax structure"
Does Mr.. Truman mean that he
plans to maintain wartime rates in
peacetime and that he intends per-
manently to maintain a relationship
whereby persons earning over $2,500
a year are to be penalized with high
rates? If he is against the proposed
rates in the Republican bill, will he
ever allow tax reductions for persons
in income groups above $2,500? E
These are the questions the voters
will have to consider seriously, and
it looks as if Mr. Truman were ask
ing for reputation at the polls. For
he can never again defend with sin
cerity or persuasiveness the system
of American free enterprise and en-
couragement of individual initiative
without making everybody recall
his class-conscious argument against
tax reduction. i
Reproduction Rights Reserved)