FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 531 
It should be noted that, from the public viewpoint, the irregulari- 
ties in yield of income taxes between different years make them ill- 
adapted as a principal source of income for meeting public revenue 
requirements. In years of depression revenues fall rapidly, and it is 
a hardship on the public to make up the losses by sharply increasing 
rates just when additional taxes are most burdensome. If income 
taxes are relied upon as the chief source of revenue for any unit of 
government, some plan is called for by which the sum available from 
this source each year may be stabilized by building up a reserve in 
years when the yield is heavy to be drawn upon in years when the 
yield is light. Such plans have been proposed but have never been 
tried (221). There may be no insuperable obstacle to the satisfactory 
solution of this problem for the larger units of government, but it is 
generally agreed that the income tax is not well adapted to the use 
of units smaller than the nation or a state of a federal government. 
However, there is nothing to prevent a state from using income tax 
revenues to relieve the local government units of some part of the 
burden of providing schools, roads, or other public services. The 
present tendency seems to be toward increased use of income taxes. 
This tendency is favorable to forestry so far as these taxes serve to 
reduce the property tax. 
DEATH TAXES 
Forest properties are, of course, subject to estate and inheritance 
taxes on the same basis as all other property making up the total 
estate of the decedent. The United States Government levies an 
estate tax, with progressive rates dependent on the amount of the 
entire estate. Death taxes are imposed in 47 States. In all but 
3 of these States they take the form of inheritance taxes, generally 
with progressive rates depending both on the amount of each dis- 
tributive share and on the degree of relationship of the several bene- 
ficiaries to the decedent. 
So far as concerns the obligation to contribute and the amount of 
the tax, forestry can have no grievance against any reasonable system 
of estate or inheritance taxation which treats forest preperty the 
same as other property in the estate. This is the case with all the 
American death taxes. There is, however, one feature of death 
taxation which may present a serious special problem to forest prop- 
erties. The death tax is a ta on capital, at rates much heavier than 
would be endurable under a property tax. On the other hand, the 
tax falls due, not annually, but only occasionally. This justifies 
relatively heavy rates, which may run quite high, especially when 
the estate is a large one. It frequently happens that the amount of 
tax due is in excess of the ealaille cash held by the estate, thus 
necessitating sale of some part of the property of the estate. This 
necessity may present a serious situation, sometimes forcing sale on 
an unfavorable market and frequently causing disruption of a business 
enterprise or loss of its control by the family or associates of the 
decedent. To these hazards forest estates are peculiarly liable. In 
the first place, not generally enjoying a regular annual income, there 
is difficulty in raising cash for payment of the tax. In the second 
place, the sale of part of the forest property, especially when it is on a 
sustained-yield basis or is being converted to such basis through 
erowth of the young stands, may have quite serious effects. Should 
