The Income Tax For Corporations

It wauld le a suffident objection to the pro'posal of the "Ways aml Moans l'ommittee to tax the ineome of corporations that the project must involve very serioais interferonce on the part of the federal government with one of the most important sources oE revenue of the states and loeal governments. This is particularly indefensibie, because the local governments are st ill exluded fromthe rlght to collect duties from customs and to tax liquors and tobáceo. The situation, then, is that the federal authoriity holdimg a monopoly of the best sources of revenue, and liaving power to supply all lts needs from those sources, dcliberately proposes to sin-render niuch of the revenue, th is procurable and to invade the lielJ oí local governments to meet lts réquirements. And if the local governments pan discover nothing new of a taxable nature, the consequence must be that corporations and their owners must be subjected to doublé taxation. Corporations usually are the creatures of the states, and that single fact would appear to make thein suitalile objects of taxation by the states. For the Uaiited States Government, without responsibility for the existence of the corporate bodies and without any warrajitable power oí control over them, to come forward to dein and moaiey from them inay be to indulge in something like a scandalous act of usurpation. Wliy should a corporation be selected a a victim oí this performance vhen a, mere partnership is perniittOd to escape ? No reason can be glven ether than that the idea is widely prevalent, and is probably entertained by many of the small democratie etatesmea im congress, that a corporatiora fa always a kind of so'ulless creature with enormous wealth. Tliere is a dim impression that a corporation is from its nature a thiiig that must prey upon the people and that encounters continual difiiculty in disguiEing the amount of its enormous galns-. Of course, Intelligent grown people are a ware that an overwhelmtag majority of Ameritan corporationa are poorer in capital and in proíit than a very largo üvumber of individual business men. In most cases, probably, a Corporation representa small partióles of capital collested into one mass and operating under a system 'which better suits such coaiditions than a mere partnership. If to liave business conducted by one individual or tivo be a good thing, to have it conducted by a Corporation acting for many iodlyiduais mast also be a good {hing. Both systcms are nood. But the corporatloo method is necessary for very largo operations and ior small operations into whicli it is dedesired to put small savtngs. Let dit be observed also that this proposed tax wili really be an extensión of the income tax below the ;?-!-,- 000 Ie vel. It wijl apply not only to the small commercial and manutacturing corporations, but to savings banks aaid to other concerns in Avhich the tlirifty poor people invest their surplus earnings. This added barden is to be placed upon them, absolutely without oecessity, by a party whtch is trying to force down wages and to deprive American producers of raw material oí employmem. Tliis new tax is placed upon the people, rich and poor, by statesmen wlio ny the piresentatiou of their project wifch protestations that they are trying to relieve the coinmon people from offensive taxation. Whut they are in tact trykig to do is to shift the tax paymenfs from the foreign cxporter and from foreisn goods, anti to place tliem -wholly upon the general mass of the people. The Wllson Tariff blll requii-ed the ineome tax bill to make the 'hole democratie tax seheine absolntely deiiaait of the requii-ements