The union times., 1948-01-31
TrumanPrOpOsaI Stacked Against 

The battle over income taxes how much to cut them and who shall get the benefits warming up in Congress. Everyone recog- n1zes that this may be a big issue in the presidential campaign.
 Republican leaders are dickering with conservative Democrats. tO form an alliance against Truman's tax proposals. This strategy is mak- ing some progress. If it succeeds. Republicans can say the President could not even hold his own party in line for his ''New Deal ideas.''
 TWO MEASURES COMPARED
 This week Congressman John D. Dingell (Dem., Mich.) presented bill embodying Truman's "cost of liv- ing credit, which would cut $40 off the Federal income tax of each in- dividual, lop $l60 from the tax bill of family of four, and enable about l0,OO0,OO0 low income people to stop paying income taxes.
 This would reduce Uncle Sam's revenues by about $3 billion. To make up for it, President Truman and the Dingell bill would put a new tax on the ''excess profits'' of corporations.
 The Republican tax measure is sponsored by Congressman Harold Knutson (Rep., Minn.). It would make some cuts in taxes on low in- comes, but would save great sums for the well-to-do and rich, and proposes no excess profits tax.
 WORST SCHEME OF ALL
 The KnutSon bill includes the "com- munlty property" tax scheme. under which wealthy husband and wife could split the family income "5O-5O," thus bringing it down into flower brackets" and greatly reducing the total tax.
 This scheme would not save a
 cent for people with small or
 even moderate incomes, and it
 would cut Uncle Sam's revenues
 by nearly $9OO million a year.
 Last week, the House Ways and Means Committee, headed by Knutson, began hearings. The first witness was John w. Snyder, who, as Secretary ot the Treasury, IS a member of Truman's Cabinet.
 Snyder generally lines up with the conservatives. This time, however, he surprised the committee by vigorously defending the Dingell bill and opposing the KnutSon measure
 The latter, Snyder said, would re- duce Federal tax revenues by $6 bill lion, and Uncle Sam cannot afford that when he is spending so much on aid to Europe and the army and navy.
 DEMOCRATIC SUPPORT?
 Last year, Truman vetoed two Knut- son tax-cutting bills. Since then, the Minnesota Congressman has sugar coated" his measure so 1t does not quite so obviously favor the rich. He now says 1t is veto proof"
 By that he means the President will have to sign it or it will be passed over his veto by twO-thirds vote in the Senate and House.
 The Republicans could not do that with their votes, alone, so C. o. P. leaders are lining up con- servative Democrats, particularly from the South.
 So far, Senators Byrd of Virginia, George of Georgia, and Congressman Doughton of North Carolina, are Democrats who have said they would "go along" with the Knutson bill, if they get certain ""face-saving" con sessions.
 TAXES IN CANADA
 To back up his proposal, Knutson put into the Record" an article from the Winnipeg Free Press" showing that taxes on incomes are lower in Canada than in the United States, but the article shows Canada has something entirely different from Knutson'S proposals.
 In Canada, for example, no fam lily which has children and IOsC ir- of four is taxed unless its annual income is over $2,5OO, compared to $2,OOO in the United States.
 NONNAy any SdlldQldll IdlIlllH which has children aud loqV income actually receives money from the Dominion Treasury, instead of paying taxes into 1t.
 BABY BONUS' AIDS POOR
 That Is because Canada pays month- ly family allowances to the parents of each child-rich or Poor-until it reaches the age of 16. These "baby bonuses" more than offset the taxes on low incomes.
 Up to an income of $500 a year, a family of four pays no tax and gets $l44 year from the Treasury.
 With an income between $1 500 and $500, family of four gets more in baby bonuses" than it pays in taxes. Even family of four with $2,5OO income receives $14 more than taxes take.
 Nothing like that is in a;fLa-