Milford chronicle., 1953-07-10
WE ALL WANT TAX CUTs-BUT HOW?

With few exceptions, everyone within the
executive and legislative branches Of the gov
ernment believes that taxes on both indiVid-
uals and businesses must be cut. The sole
difference Of opinion is over the question of
when and how.
The Administration has taken the posi-
ton that, desirable and essential as tax re-
duction is, it must wait until the budget is
brought under control and is in or near a
balance. Until relatively recently, it seemed
that in all probability this position would pre-
vail. That is not the case now. The Eisen-
mower tax program is in very real difficulties
on the Congressional shoals.
There are. two reasons for this. For one,
public demand for early tax reduction is ex-
trenely strong apparently the Congress-
iOnal mail has been loaded with it. For an
other, Chairman Daniel A. Reed Of the House
Ways and Means Committee stands sOlidly
for immediate tax cuts and all the efforts of
Administration representatives to change his
views have availed nothing. By virtue of
this Craftsmanship, Mr. Reed is one of the
most powerful men in the government when
It comes to tax policy. The committee must
originate all changes and renewals of our tax
laws, and the chairman's authority is enor-
nous.
Matters came to a head over the so-called
exeess-prOfitS tax. This tax is about as un-
"A
has denounced it. So has Senator Taft. So
have practically all other authorities in and
out OF government. Almost all agree that the
tax is a killer of initiative and enterprise.
and that it's especially evil in that it is most
DuroensOme to the smaller corporations and
IS an lmplacable obstacle to normal growth.
Yet the Administration made extension of the
tax Tor another six months one of the musts
IN It's fiscal program. Two arguments can he
Used In iUCfifxT thnA rosi4ioy,
no source OF government revenue should be
abandoned just noW-though this is deba-
table argument In the case of the excess-prOf-.
us tax, Tor the reason that many believe its
abandonment would stimulate business ex-
panslOn and activity to the point where the
new revenue gained through income taxes
would more than Offset the losses. The sec
ono IS that, for political reasons, it would be
dangerous to materially reduce or eliminate a
tax which is borne entirely by business un-
less taxes on individuals were also lightened
at the same time. And the Administration
cannot afford to overlook political matters
IN view Of the fact that the entire House must
stand for election next year.
On the other side and still dealing with
politics, there are leading Republicans Rep
resentative Reed among them, who are con
Nlnced that It taxes are not cut all along the
llne, even before anything resembling bal
anced budget is in sight, the COP will take
pad beating In the off-year elections.
these points, of course, are speculations.
Mnat IS not speculation is that President
lElsenhoWer's present tax program, for all of
ms vast standing and the affection and re-
spect IN which he is held by millions, is a far
cry from popular one. The advocates of inn
lneolate tax reduction may. be wrong or they
may De flght-strOng arguments can be mar
snalieo si on either side. But it is evident that
tney reflect widespread and growing public
Ieellng that the tax burden is becoming in
superable.