| STATEMENT OF SECRETARY MORGENTHAU BEFORE THE
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE Thursday, September 3,
1942.
[1] I have come before you today with a program to
raise substantial additional sums to finance the war
effort. I intend to leave the details of the presentation
to Mr. Paul and his associates and to limit myself to
emphasizing the gravity of the situation as I see it and
the imperative need for legislation along the lines we
are suggesting.
[2] Up to this point our huge war expenditures have
been financed in an orderly way and with a minimum of
inflationary effects. But the more successful the war
production program becomes, the greater are the
dimensions of the fiscal problem we have to face. We have
to plan for expenditures of $80 billion in the present
fiscal year, while the revenue in sight on the basis of
the tax bill now before you is only approximately 24
billions.
[3] The Treasury has diligently sought and will
continue to seek funds from those sources where borrowing
will have the least inflationary effect, and we have done
so with what I believe to be most gratifying results. We
can foresee with confidence provision for the
Government's fiscal needs for the remainder of this
calendar year.
[4] But I am here today to tell you frankly that I
need your help in the form of legislation which will
enable me to meet, with the same degree of confidence,
the much greater problem of raising the necessary funds
for next year.
[5] The legislation which we are proposing has a
double purpose. The first purpose is to draw into the
Treasury substantial additional funds out of the earnings
and savings of the people. The second purpose is even
more important. It is to reduce consumer spending
directly by withdrawing funds otherwise available for
expenditure, and to reduce it also indirectly by creating
a strong tax incentive to saving.
[6] The measures we propose are two: first, a tax on
consumer spending which will reach into the lowest income
groups above the level of bare subsistence income and
will provide high penalty rates for luxury spending;
second, a further lowering of the exemptions from the
income tax applying to family income.
[7] The two proposals will reach into incomes
aggregating some 65 billions of dollars and will draw
into the Treasury an estimated six and a half billion
dollars otherwise available for consumer spending. But of
this total some four and a half billions, although raised
as a tax, will be treated not as revenue but as a debt to
the individuals from whom it was collected, to be repaid
after the war.
[8] Revenue is not the sole purpose, nor even the
primary purpose, of either of these proposals. Their main
purpose is to restrict consumer spending so that, as far
as possible through fiscal means, we may avoid the perils
of inflation in the huge financing program that we have
ahead of us.
[9] It can be expected that the new spending tax will
reduce in many individual cases the amounts which workers
can afford to set aside for War Bonds under voluntary
payroll deduction plans. In the face of present
conditions we can no longer afford to rely entirely upon
voluntary lending. The new proposals are intended,
therefore, to supplement the voluntary bond purchase
program.
[10] It is my belief that the voluntary War Bond
program has produced and will continue to produce a great
contribution to the nation's war effort. This is due to
the unselfish service that hundreds of thousands of men
and women throughout the country have given to it. They
deserve the thanks of the nation for the magnificent work
they have done, are doing, and will, I hope, go on doing,
in encouraging the American people to put their dollars
to work for their country. The voluntary War Bond program
will, of course, be continued.
[11] Our present and urgent problem is to borrow the
great amounts that will be needed to finance the war
effort in ways that will not contribute to inflation.
Inflationary pressure is created by consumer demand
exceeding the supply of goods available. The Treasury is
seeking in these proposals to attack the problem at its
roots and to attack it drastically.
[12] The control of prices is of course not
exclusively a fiscal problem. But with full allowance for
all that can be done through price regulation, rationing
and other devices to control supply, I think that we, who
are jointly responsible for tax policy and legislation,
shall be doing very much less than our full duty if we do
not deal with the problem as effectively as possible in
the fiscal field. What I have presented is a method --
and the best method the Treasury has been able to devise
for accomplishing this result.
[13] If the proposals we make seem drastic, I should
like to say with all possible emphasis that I believe
nothing less drastic will accomplish the results we must
have. This is no time for half- way measures.
[14] With the fullest respect for the Committee on
Finance, but with a strong sense of our joint
responsibility in these critical times, I do not merely
recommend bold action along these lines; I request it and
I urge it most seriously, and with the profound
conviction that it must be done.
|