Page Six 



THE I, A. A. RECORD 



N 



_ I LiLilNOIS 



CVL.TVBAL, ASSOCIA 



RECORiy 



To advance the purpoit for which the Farm Bureau u/ts organized, 

 namely, to promote, protect and represent the business, economic, political, 

 and educational interests of the farmers of Illinois and the nation, 

 and to detelop agriculture. 



Editor, George Thiein 



Published once a month by the Illinois Agricultural Association, 

 at 124 So. Fifth St.,- Marshall, III. Adress all communications for publi- 

 cation to Editorial Office, 608 So. Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. Entered as 

 second-class matter June 16, 1930, at the post office at Marshall, 111., 

 under the Act of March 3, 1879. Accepted for mailing at special rate of 

 postage provided for in Section 412, Act of Feb. 28, 1925, authorized 

 Oct. 27, 1925. The individual membership fee of the Illinois Agricultural 

 Association is five dollars a year. The fee includes payment of fifty cents 

 for subscription to the Illinois Agricultural Association Record. Post- 

 master: In returning an uncalled for missent copy please indicate key 

 number on address as is required by law. 



OFFICERS 



President, Earl C. Smith— Detroit 



Vice-President, A. R Wright Varna 



Secretary, Geo. E. Metzger 



Treasurer, R. A. Cowles 



Chicago 



..Bloomington 



lit to 11th. 



12th. 



I3th 



I4th_ 

 ISth- 

 leth- 

 17th-. 

 18th_ 

 19th-. 

 20th-. 

 21st... 

 22nd- 



BOARD OF DIRECTORS 



(By Congressional District) 



_ H. C. Vial, Downen Grove 



G. F. Tullock, Rockford 



C. E. Bamborough, Polo 



. M. G. Lambert, Ferris 



A. N. Skinner, Yates City 



Geo. B. HuUer, Washington 



Geo. J. Stoll, Chestnut 



...W. A. Dennis. Paris 



23rd- 



24th.. 

 2Sth- 



C. J. Gross, Atwood 



..Charles S. Black. Jacksonville 



Samuel Sorrclls, Raymond 



Frank Oexner, Waterloo 



W. L. Cope. Salem 



Charles Marshall 



Fred Dietz, De Soto 



Comptroller 



Dairy Marketing- 

 Finance.. 



DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS 



Fruit and Vegetable Marketing... 



Grain Marketing 



Information 



Insurance Service- 



Legal Counsel 



Limestone- Phosphate 



Live Stock Marketing 



Office. - — 



Organization ___ 



Produce Marketing 



..J. H. Kelker 



A. D. Lynch 



R. A. Cowles 



A. B. Leeper 



—Harrison Fabrnkopf 



_ George Thiem 



_V. Vaniman 



Donald Kirkpatrick 



..J. R Bent 



Ray E. Miller 



C. E. Johnston 



G. E. Metzger 



F. A. Gougler 



Taxation and Statistics.. - - - J. C. Watson 



Transportation - L. J. Quasey 



ASSOCIATED ORGANIZATIONS 



Country Life Insurance Co - - L. A. Williams, Mgr. 



Farmers Mutual Reinsurance Co - _ J. H. Kelker, Mgr. 



Illinois Agricultural Co-operatives Ass'n F. E. Ringham, Mgr. 



Illinois Agricultural Mutual Insurance Co A. E. Richardson, Mgr. 



Illinois Farm Supply Co - L. R. Marchant, Mgr. 



The Revenue Amendment 



THE position of the Illinois Agricultural Association on 

 the proposed revenue amendment is set forth at length 

 in the article beginning on page 3. We commend it for 

 your careful study and consideration. The attitude ex- 

 pressed in this statement was adopted only after careful 

 and deliberate thought of all the possibilities for tax reform 

 should the projx)sed amendment be enacted into law. For 

 the benefit of those who wish to study and compare the 

 exact wording of the present revenue article, and the 

 wording in the proposed amendment, both are published 

 side by side on page 5. 



/. A, A. States Stand on Revenue 

 I Amendment 



(Continued from page 3) 



corporate purposes of such taxing districts. Um'er this pro- 

 vision, no taxes collected by the stiae can now be distrib- 

 uted to any taxing district for unrestricted use. Neither 

 the State School Fund nor the Gasoline Tax Fund are excep- 

 tions to this rule, because the state directs the manner of 

 using both. 



The amendment, if adopted, would modify the above 



restrictions, first, not only by permitting but by directing 

 that 8 5 per cent of the net proceeds of any tax im{>o$ed 

 upon income be returned to the counties In proportion to 

 the amount collected in each, unless the percentage named 

 were decreased by the aflSrmative votes of two-thirds of 

 tjie membeii elected to each House of the General Assembly; 

 second, by permitting the General Assembly, by general 

 law, to provide for the further distribution of the amount 

 allocated to each county among the county and other taxing 

 districts wholly or partly therein; third, by permitting the 

 General Assembly, in such manner as it may direct by gen- 

 eral law, to provide for the distribution of any part of other 

 taxes collected by the state among the counties and other 

 taxing districts. 



Limitation Bad Feature ^1. ■ 



The state should not be limited to 15 per cent of the net 

 proceeds of any tax upon income. The legislative experi- 

 ence of the association shows the extreme improbability of 

 the- two-thirds vote necessary to increase the percentage to 

 more than 15. Much more probable would be a decrease 

 in the percentage to be retained by the state, a change re- 

 quiring only a majority vote of the members elected to each 

 House. So severe a limitation upon the state would surely 

 prevent it from receiving the revenue from income taxes 

 necessary to enable it to assume certain indispensable func- 

 tions, the most important of which is the assuring of equal 

 educational opjjortunities to every child in the state. 



It should not be made possible for the General Asxmbly, 

 by majority vote, to provide for the distributior. of any 

 part of other taxes collected by the state. There iK-ing no 

 provision to the contrary, the granting of such power would 

 include not only all new forms of taxation adopted here- 

 after, except only a tax on incomes, but also all taxes now 

 collected and wholly retained by the state. Except in the 

 general property tax and in the simplest forms of personal 

 income taxes, it is difficult if not impossible to determine 

 the place of origin of income out of which taxes are paid. 



How Determine Sources of Income? 



For example, it is impossible to locate the various geo- 

 graphical sources of income out of which the state now 

 rightfully collects and retains an average total of $17,000,- 

 000 in taxes per year on inheritances, corporations and in- 

 surance privileges. It is impossible also to distinguish be- 

 tween local communities and others in the benefits conferred 

 by some kinds of improvements, especially good roads. It 

 is right, therefore, that the state should retain control of the 

 motor license fees, now over $17,000,000 per year, and the 

 gasoline taxes, now about $25,000,000 per year, for the 

 improvement and maintenance of the pubUc highways. 



The legislative experience of the association indicates 

 that the adoption of the amendment would be followed by 

 the most insistent demand by various taxing districts that 

 inheritance taxes, corporation taxes, insurance privilege taxes, 

 and even gasoline taxes be distributed for unrestricted uses. 

 The state would probably soon be stripped of most of the 

 revenues now collected from sources other than the property 

 tax, causing a heavy increase in taxes on property even to 

 maintain present state functions, doing irreparable injury 

 to the improvement and maintenance of the state and 

 county highway systems, and making it impossible for the 

 state to assume highly desirable or even necessary additional 

 functions without further heavy increase in property taxes. 



Making Local Improvements by Special Taxation 

 of Contiguous Property 



Adoption of the amendement would enable the General 

 Assembly to vest the corporate authorities not only of 

 cities, towns and villages, which alone are named in the 

 present revenue article, but also of sanitary districts, park 



