Comments upon reaction to the undistributed
profits tax observed in talks with business men
(Memo. from Mr. Upham to Mr. Magill, October 9, 1937)
October 9, 1937
MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MAGILL
I found the feeling among business men and bankers
against the tax on undistributed earnings even more
marked during my recent trip than it had been in May.
Nearly every banker I visit gives me numerous
illustrations drawn from among the customers of his own
institution of business concerns which have abandoned
expansion plans because of the penalties and rigors, as
they see it, of the UP tax. Moreover, in numerous
instances I encounter the business men themselves.
Let me cite briefly four examples.
(1) In New Orleans is a banker who has $30,000 to set
his two sons up in business. He is completely discouraged
about starting them in business because if they lose
money, they stand a loss of 100 per cent, and if they
make money, they cannot build the business institution
into a constantly increasing unit by adding to surplus
without paying a penalty rate and they cannot distribute
to themselves as stockholders and owners without paying a
personal income tax so high that it is a discouragement
to their business initiative and interest in operating a
business at all.
(2) The president of a very substantial concern in
Kansas City which branch plans in more than a dozen
states has had in contemplation the establishment of a
number of new branches -- which would mean the employment
of construction labor and the permanent addition of
employees to the payroll of his company. He has abandoned
all of his plans for new branches due almost entirely he
says, and I think honestly, to the UP tax.
This particular individual, who has many complaints
about the Bureau of Internal Revenue and taxes generally,
has one angle which I had not had elsewhere, which may be
of interest to you.
He says that one reason he cannot adopt the suggestion
made by the proponents of the UP tax to increase the
capitalization of his company is that the many states in
which he operates branches base their tax upon
capitalization rather than upon actual value of the
business.
(3) A newspaper publisher in Des Moines with a fairly
modern plant, newly erected only ten or twelve years ago,
needs a completely new and enlarged publishing plant and
plans were all made for the erection of such a building,
out of accumulated surplus, at the time the UP tax was
passed. They have abandoned the plan because of the
impossibility of great difficulty or penalty in building
up a new surplus to replace that which would have been
expended for expansion.
(4) A Federal Reserve Bank, in accordance with the
policy of encouraging loans to industry where it was
impossible to secure them from commercial banks, made a
substantial industrial loan. Later the UP tax was
enacted. That concern is now penalized if it pays off to
the Reserve Bank the loan which was made to enable it not
to make a great profit but to barely continue in
existence.
Even if cushions were inserted in the act to take care
of those concerns which are in debt (for instance, the
new struggling small company which has lost money and
gone in debt for five years and made money for one year),
those which have statutory or contract obligations and
those which for some other reason need special treatment,
many of the business men would still oppose the tax. In
short, there is not as much belief in the principle of
the tax as there formerly has been. Accounting and
banking and credit concepts give tremendous importance to
the surplus as a part of an American business
institution. It will take a generation to greatly
minimize the importance that is given to that concept.
It is not that business men feel their total tax is
too great. A straight percentage income tax which took as
much actual cash out of the business would not be
resented. By the feeling is widespread (and business men
believe there is evidence of its deleterious effect upon
business activity) that the combined penalty on surplus
accumulation and high personal income tax will result in
a lessened business activity and eventually, for that
reason, in greatly reduced tax revenues.
Upm
|