| OCR Text |
Show j A SHOT OR A KICK The House of Representatives' calendar at the beginning of this week was loaded with recovery measures, much-needed irrigation and water law, protective measures for cities and towns, and many other bills of general application. Despite this fact, the House sifting committee's calendar for the first day's consideration was packed with five measures, meas-ures, each of which was calculated to give a "shot in the arm'' to one class of citizens and a "kick in the pants" to another. First for consideration was S.B. No. 88, to increase individual in-dividual income tax ratos designed to transfer taxes from the land owner to the forgotten man the small business man and the school teacher, who remain" forgotten. Second came S.B. No. 1, the corporation franchise tax, in which the House Committee had recommended domination of property tax offsets which would tend to shift the burden from the man who pays only property taxes, to the corporation corpora-tion which pays both property and franchise taxes. Third, was H.B. No. 62, to increase the premium tax paid by insurance companies and thus shift some of the burden from the farmer and property owner, to the shoulders of the same farmer, and the same property owner who hold small insurance policies on their lives,' either by increasing their premium or by decreasing their policy dividend devious de-vious but true. Fourth came H.B. No. 16, to levy a tax of four cents per 1000 cubic feet, on natural gas; the proceeds to go to the state general fund and thus relieve general property taxes. The purpose of this bill would be to put a tariff of $1.14 a ton on coal. The result would be to increase the price of coal by at least $1 per ton to the farmer, the laborer and the school teacher. Last on the calendar was H,B. No. 4, relating to workmen's work-men's compensation. This bill would give the state insurance insur-ance fund a monopoly on all such insurance except where large corporations are self-insurers.- It would at least double the cost of this type of insurance to all employers. The state insurance fund, by the way, pays no taxes to the state. The vice of the first day's program in the House, is that all this legislation merely tended to substitute one tax-payer for another with the manifest purpose of advancing the interests in-terests of one group to the detriment of another. Surely the House sifting committee must have sat up all night to select the five measures which would be most effective in retarding the recovery of the state of Utah. Utah Press Association. |
