Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, February 1899: Volume LIV, No. 4, February 1899Various
Science
Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, February 1899: Volume LIV, No. 4, February 1899
Various
Science -- Periodicals; Technology -- Periodicals
These conclusions respecting the diffusion of taxes may be said to be
universally accepted by economists so far as they relate to the
results of production before they reach the hands of the final
consumers; but they are not accepted by many, as Mr. Henry George has
recently expressed it, in respect to taxes on special profits or
advantages on things of which the supply is strictly limited, or of
wealth in the hands of final consumers, or in the course of
distribution by gift, and finally in respect to taxes on land. But a
little examination would seem to show that all of these exceptions are
of the kind that are said to prove the rule. _Special profits_ and
advantages in this age of quick diffusion of knowledge and intense
competition are exceedingly ephemeral, and are mainly confined to
results which the State with a view of encouraging removes for a
limited time from the natural laws of competition by granting patents,
copyrights, and franchises. Of things which are strictly limited in
respect to supply, what and where are they? Only a very few can be
specified: ivory, Peruvian guano, whalebone, ambergris, and the pelts
of the fur seal. Of wealth in the process of transmission, or in the
hands of final consumers, it is not _tangible_ wealth unless it is
_tangible_ property, which conforms under any correct system of
taxation to the principles of taxation; and if any one advocates the
taxation of the right to receive property which has already been
taxed, he in effect advocates a double exaction of one and the same
thing. If it be asked, Will an income tax on a person retired from
business be diffused? the answer, beyond question, must be in the
affirmative, if the tax is uniform on all persons and on all amounts,
and is absolutely collected in minute sums. Would any one pay the same
price for a railroad bond which is subject to an income tax as he
would for it if it was free from tax? If one's land is taxed, either
in the form of rent or income, will not the tenant have the burden
primarily thrown upon him? And, finally, will not the consumer of the
tenant's goods pay through or by reason of such consumption?
Respecting the incidence of the tax on mortgages, it does not make any
difference how mortgages are taxed--no earthly power can make the
lender pay it. If the borrower would not agree to pay the tax, the
lender would not loan him money, and whenever possible loans would be
foreclosed and payment insisted upon if the borrower should refuse to
pay the tax.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account