Modern

WARTIME TAX REPEAL IS URGED
BY 51 INDUSTRIAL EXECUTIVES
Johnston and Distributor
Heads Join in Signing
Washington Post Ad
NEW YORK—The coordinated national
campaign of many industries for repeal of
the wartime excise taxes reached a new high
during the week with a full-page newspaper
advertisement which, placed in the Washington
Post, could not fail to be read by Congress
and the administration. This industry
was represented prominently among the
signers of the National Committee for the
Repeal of Wartime Excise Taxes sponsoring
the advertisement. They were Eric Johnston,
president of the Motion Picture Ass'n of
America; Leonard H. Goldenson, president,
United Paramount Theatres; Nicholas M.
Schenck, president, Loew's, Inc.; Spyros P.
Skouras, president, 20th Century-Fox, and
Harry M. Warner, president, Warner Bros.
Johnston is a vice-chairman of the committee.
REOPENS A CAMPAIGN
The advertisement reopened a newspaper
advertising campaign begun last fall which
included a full-page ad in the Washington
Post and New York Times published "in the
interest of American business and labor" by
a large number of industrial organizations,
including MPAA and TOA. It followed a
meeting of retail organizations at the Waldorf-Astoria
hotel, in which this industry participated,
called by the American Retail
Federation. Individual industries then followed
with similar ads in their trade publications.
HARRY S. TRIMAN
PRESIDENT
WASHINGTON, D.C
IF YOU WANT
TO GO TO
THE MOVIES
MORE OFTEN, WRITE TODAY!
Why should there be any tax on movies?
l( you and all the fans in America ACT
NOW you'll see ACTION in Washington.
Write the President NOW!
Si Scadler, advertising manager of
MGM, has produced an ad which is to be
used in full-page size in all fan magazines
as part of the campaign against
the admission tax.
TAX COLLECTOR
Every theatre cashier also works for
Uncle Sam, so Kay Bickell, cashier at
Loew's State, New York, points up the
fact by wearing a cap in line with
Loew's suggestion to all exhibitors that
they have their cashiers do likewise, to
emphasize the campaign for admissions
tax repeal.
The latest ad, which probably will be repeated
in more newspapers, was titled "A
Petition to the Congress of the United States
from 51 executives in American industry." It
read:
"The wartime excise taxes were passed as
wartime controls in 1941. 1942, 1943. They
served their purpose well. But the war is
over. It has been over for more than four
years. Everyone agrees today that wartime
excise taxes are unfair in peacetime. They
are discriminatory. They penalize selected
industries, the men and women who work in
them, the pubUc which needs and buys their
products. They have created serious unemployment
in certain industries and communities.
They prevent fair and free competition.
"Everyone agrees with this statement of the
President in his tax message: 'There is need
to reduce taxes which burden consumption
and handicap particular businesses . . . Some
(excise taxes) are depressing certain lines of
business. Some burden consumption and fall
with particular weight on low income groups.
Still others add to the cost of Uving by increasing
business costs.' And—this statement
is just and statesmanlike.
"We beUeve that the same sound reasoning
applies not only to the seven industries for
which the President recommended some relief,
but applies with equal force and equal
justice to all of the wartime excise tax
levies of 1941, 1942, 1943 (not including tobacco,
gasoline and alcoholic beverages which
present problems of their own) on all of the
27 industries affected.
"These excise taxes were justified during
wartime. They are unjust and discriminatory
during peacetime. To repeal some of them
now and allow others to remain is only to
alter the shape of the discrimination.
"We support the President in his concern
for a balanced budget and debt reduction at
high employment, and we are convinced, after
careful study, that wartime excise taxes are
today a dangerous obstacle to the achievement
of these goals. This is a matter of
simple arithmetic.
"1. How much revenue would the federal
government lose if the wartime excise
taxes of 1941. 1942, 1943 (excluding those
on tobacco, gasoline and alcoholic beverages)
were entirely repealed? The net
loss will not exceed $1,500,000,000; it may
well be less.
"2. Can the federal government safely
accept such a reduction of revenue? The
budget now includes $1,920,000,000 to make
loans and purchase certain assets, many
of which are already guaranteed by government
agencies. Guaranteed mortgages
and loans are a major part of this item.
This $1,920,000,000 is not an expense; it
is a recoverable asset. (See page U17 of
the federal budget just published.)
"3. This sum alone is greater than the
maximum net loss of all wartime excise
taxes of 1941, 1942, 1943 (excluding the
three exceptions mentioned above.)
CITE CONSUMER PROTEST
"American consumers have already registered
their protest against these wartime
levies. They have done so by drastically cutting
their spending in most of the 27 industries
affected. They are waiting for their
Congress to act. Every passing week adds to
the cutback in buying, in production, in unemployment.
Every passing week adds to the
crisis.
"This committee has been organized for
the sole purpose of presenting a just petition
for the redress of a serious grievance. We
ask justice for the public which pays these
unfair taxes. Justice for those of our employes
who have been taxed onto the relief
rolls through no fault of their own. Justice
A Petition to
The Congress of
the United States
from SI Executives in American Industry
Page Advertisement in Washington Post.
BOXOFFICE :: February 4, 1950 J.