Search

The article discusses three postwar tax plans that are being considered in the United States. One plan is from the Research Committee for Economic Development (CED). Another is sponsored by the National Planning Association and prepared by Beardsley Ruml and H. Chr. Sonne. The third is called the Twin Cities Plan. Two of the plans are based almost exclusively on personal income taxes with corporate taxes, excise, and sales taxes taking a lesser role. These two plans also would promote a policy of long-run deficit financing. In the Twin Cities Plan, nearly half of the revenue would come from excise and sales taxes. Topics include the elimination of double taxation on dividend income, corporate tax avoidance, and revenue yields from the three plans.

The article discusses corporate tax reform in postwar United States and a potential shortage of working capital for industrial reconversion. If the carry-back procedure for business losses is revised, a shortage of working capital for reconversion will be avoided. Taxpayers can combine the carry-back and carry-over provisions to calculate income and excess profits tax liabilities on a five-year average. Topics include deductible surplus reserves, tax treatment of special wartime reserves, shorter amortization periods for emergency war production facilities, and early refund of the excess profits tax liabilities if it will be used for financing production and business conversions.

The following tax program was prepared in November 1950 by six experts on fiscal policy from three Harvard faculties (Department of Economics, Law School, and Graduate School of Business Administration), under the title "A Tax Program to Support the Policy of Containment," to indicate the nature and scale of taxation which will be needed, along with appropriate credit policies and limited direct controls, to avoid serious price inflation when the current mobilization program gets fully under way. The statement was presented in part at the Hearings of the House Ways and Means Committee on November 16, but the Committee refused to allow the full text to be included in the record because of its policy of limiting the testimony to the subject of excess profits taxation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In view of the strong tax incentives to adopt the Lifo, or "last in, first out," method of inventory valuation during the war years, it is rather surprising that the method is still restricted to a relatively small fraction of the corporate economy. This article investigates the major considerations which have been taken into account by business executives in deciding whether to adopt Lifo--and which may therefore be of significance to other businessmen wishing to consider, or perhaps reconsider, the question for their own companies. The incentives to adopt Lifo have temporarily abated because of the current softening of the price structure and the uncertainty about business prospects. But the problem has not been permanently disposed of; it will again become urgent for the managements of non-Lifo companies as soon as another major price rise appears imminent. In order that action may be taken promptly when the circumstances are favorable, it is important that the issues be thought through in advance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]