JSK_BB8_F37 28 |
Previous | 28 of 142 | Next |
|
Page 2. August 2, 1971
within the law. Yet the so-called "tax reform" legislation of 1969
resulted in some $2 billion less income for the government than the
old law.
In summary* I detest the dubious evasion of taxes, and a situation
where a very few people have all of their holdings in tax frees and
pay nothing. The late Mrs. Dodge of Detroit was a good example.
I favored a reform which would have corrected this.
The other side is that excessive taxation from the federal government,
the states, counties and cities is bound to have a negative effect upon
business prosperity, and in turn revenues and employment.
Federal taxation was originally intended to provide the monies needed
for the conduct of our government. It has since been used to advance
"reforms, " support special causes and a variety of txbher ptmposes.
Business and industry can prosper so long as they understand the ground
rules. But when the rules are changed day by day, they have serious
problems.
So we can all be for just taxation, but not confiscation. For instance, I
am president of a Foundation -- and a good one --which will be liquidated
by the government under the new rules. By next year, we will have to
make a pay-out on the holdings of the Foundation which is greater than
its income and will force a aale of securities. By 1975, the pay-out will
be 6 per cent* In addition, there is a tax on income. So we are con¬
sidering getting out of the Foundation business, and so contributions to
art institutes, symphonies, hospitals and universities will cease.
Our overhead on Foundation management Is approximately $15, 000 a
year. Theee are no salaries for directors. So this is clearly a case
of burning down the barn to catch a few "rats. "
Rockefeller, Ford and the "mom and pop" foundations have been guilty
of indiscretions and even cheating among the "smalls. " Yet the Congress
declares that all foundations must pay out a larger sum than a prudently
invested portfolio can produce. Thus, the process of slow liquidation is
under way.
This is justice?
Object Description
| Title | Philadelphia Inquirer — Black, Creed C.; Editor (1970-1976)(JSK_BB8_F37) |
| Creator | John S. Knight |
| Date Notes | 1970-1976 |
| Description | Correspondence with Creed Black, editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer |
| Link to Finding Aid Repository | http://ead.ohiolink.edu/xtf-ead/view?docId=ead/OhAkUAS0008.xml;query=;brand=default |
| Subject Terms | Black, Creed C., 1925-2011 |
| Type | Text |
| Digital Publisher | University of Akron. Archival Services |
| Date Digitized | 2015-06 |
| Copyright Statement | This image is protected by copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code). Copyright to this image lies with The University of Akron which makes it available for personal use for private study, scholarship, or research. Any other use of this image including publications, exhibitions, or productions is prohibited without written permission of The University of Akron Archival Services. Please contact Archival Services at archives@uakron.edu for more information. |
| Source Collection | John S. Knight Papers |
| Identifier | JSK_BB8_F37.pdf |
| Medium | Document |
| Format-Extent | 142 pages |
| Collection Category |
Communications Individual/Families |
| UA College | University Libraries |
| UA Department | Archival Services |
| Website | http://www.uakron.edu/libraries/archives/ |
| Contact Information | Telephone: 330-972-7670; Fax: 330-972-6170; E-mail:archives@uakron.edu |
Description
| Title | JSK_BB8_F37 28 |
| Type | Text |
| Source Collection | John S. Knight Papers |
| Medium | Document |
| Collection Category |
Communications Individual/Families |
| UA College | University Libraries |
| UA Department | Archival Services |
| Website | http://www.uakron.edu/libraries/archives/ |
| Contact Information | Telephone: 330-972-7670; Fax: 330-972-6170; E-mail:archives@uakron.edu |
| transcript | Page 2. August 2, 1971 within the law. Yet the so-called "tax reform" legislation of 1969 resulted in some $2 billion less income for the government than the old law. In summary* I detest the dubious evasion of taxes, and a situation where a very few people have all of their holdings in tax frees and pay nothing. The late Mrs. Dodge of Detroit was a good example. I favored a reform which would have corrected this. The other side is that excessive taxation from the federal government, the states, counties and cities is bound to have a negative effect upon business prosperity, and in turn revenues and employment. Federal taxation was originally intended to provide the monies needed for the conduct of our government. It has since been used to advance "reforms, " support special causes and a variety of txbher ptmposes. Business and industry can prosper so long as they understand the ground rules. But when the rules are changed day by day, they have serious problems. So we can all be for just taxation, but not confiscation. For instance, I am president of a Foundation -- and a good one --which will be liquidated by the government under the new rules. By next year, we will have to make a pay-out on the holdings of the Foundation which is greater than its income and will force a aale of securities. By 1975, the pay-out will be 6 per cent* In addition, there is a tax on income. So we are con¬ sidering getting out of the Foundation business, and so contributions to art institutes, symphonies, hospitals and universities will cease. Our overhead on Foundation management Is approximately $15, 000 a year. Theee are no salaries for directors. So this is clearly a case of burning down the barn to catch a few "rats. " Rockefeller, Ford and the "mom and pop" foundations have been guilty of indiscretions and even cheating among the "smalls. " Yet the Congress declares that all foundations must pay out a larger sum than a prudently invested portfolio can produce. Thus, the process of slow liquidation is under way. This is justice? |
