The following quotations have been taken from an article which appeared last February 27 in a French publication, "Aspects de la France, written by René d'Argile and entitled: "A Tax On Capital; Death Duties"
The principles set forth in the article hold true for all countries, Canada as well as France. In this country we are victims of a double tax on inheritances, one levied by the despoilers in Ottawa, the other by those in Quebec or Toronto.
Here are the excerpts mentioned above which we have taken from 'Aspects de la France':
"For twenty years now the principles governing our public revenues have been inspired by Marxist doctrine. Taxation has been transformed into an instrument for economic spoliation, for the appropriation of wealth and the progressive collectivisation of property.
The real objective has been masked under the fallacious pretext of social justice, which bait, the gullible, so-called intellectuals have swallowed hook, line and sinker. It is especially through the direct tax that the collectivists have sought to destroy private property. A bald declaration to this effect was recently made by the Soviet minister of finance: 'We have renounced the direct tax levy and, now gather 96% of our revenues through indirect taxation because the direct tax is no longer politically of any use to us. It was "an excellent means of destroying capitalism, of suppressing the middle class and of wiping out savings. These no longer exist and we have attained the only true democratic fiscal system, the indirect levy.
That which Marxism has been able to carry through to completion in Russia, socialism is trying to accomplish in France, especially since the "Liberation". We are suffering today from the results of this policy.
At the present time, succession taxes are wiping out inheritances in two or three generations or even less. It is spoliation pure and simple. Balzac, that prophetic spirit, had foreseen that the taxation of inheritances would break down the system of private property especially among the rural classes.
Of all the forms of taxation, the succession taxes are those which destroy more surely capital already built up, and hinders the building up of future savings by destroying the incentive to save. After all, why spend a lifetime doing without things to build up a sizeable savings if the government is going to seize it when you die! Succession taxes systematically destroy private ownership of property. They are one of the causes of the housing crisis. Private capital is unwilling to go into the building of lodgings, apartment houses especially, not only because of the small return, the rental laws, but also because tenement constructions are most heavily hit by succession taxes from which they can find no relief as can other forms of capital. As for land, it is the favorite prey of succession taxes. In order to pay off such taxes, the estate must be sold or cut up. The succession taxes are breaking down and wiping out the landed class to the great harm of France's agriculture. All the measures taken to build up a landed class go for nothing when, through the succession taxes, everything that has been built up rurally is torn down each generation. The result of such a state of affairs is that the value of rural property in France has dropped by more than one third since 1914. These are some of the consequences of the tax on inheritances. They are the most iniquitous, the most anti-democratic form of taxes. And they are at the same time, prejudicial to the fiscal system itself, for they tend to wipe out the very scource of the fiscal system's revenues in this respect. The first reform to be undertaken would be simply to abolish this tax. Mr. Pinay has said that he is in favor of such a tax but only in the direct line of inheritance and between spouses. But why in a direct line only? Whosoever has legitimately acquired goods during his life, has, at death, the right to transmit these goods to whomsoever he thinks should have them.
We submit the following thought for meditation to those who are the foremost advocates and preachers of the doctrine of saving your money, and who are at the same time the ones who find us guilty of a mortal sin if we don't pay our taxes down to the last cent.
The doctrine of saving is excellent in theory, but it is sadly out of touch with reality.
Consider the facts objectively. Savings today are ruined by inflation which is steadily rising, and by a fiscal theory with a rapidly growing appetite for tax money. It would therefore be far more practical to preach justice to the banks and the governments, to free the people from financials dictatorship rather than preaching saving to the people who only find that, more and more, their savings go to fatten the wallets of those who control our financial system.
"You must, in conscience, pay taxes!" How often do we hear that? Where, in fact, does our tax money go? For the most part it flows into the pockets of the financiers who use it as a weapon to destroy the true proprietors of this country. Are they just, these taxes? "The unjust law does not have to be obeyed?" says St: Thomas Aquinas. Then why should unjust taxes oblige the conscience?
The taxes on property and on inheritances have for their end to "suppress the middle class and to wipe out savings." Is this a legitimate end? No more legitimate than the communism which inspires it. Then why should these taxes oblige in conscience? The tax on income comes under the same category since it makes it impossible for the proprietor to be borne at all. A worker told me that during the war he had given one complete house to the government in income tax – $8,000.00. That's the reason he is still a tenant. The result of taxes, is to despoil the proprietor at the very time when the immense progress being made through the machine, should be enriching every citizen. Under such conditions how can we possibly speak of justice, or obligation in conscience? The principle should be preached. But to understand the principles you have to be in touch with reality. And above all, you must remember other principles, such as that of the protection of the family, of the family possessions against the governments, legitimately constituted, but doubtful in their legislation.
The first families which came to this land, built up through their labors, an inheritance for their descendants. These descendants in turn have labored to enrich this patrimony still further. And yet the latter are today poorer than the former were. This can be seen in that our forefathers were proprietors, whereas the majority of us are simple tenants. Our forefathers were owners of their own businesses. The majority of us are employed. We are poorer than they, we are less free, simply because we have been systematically despoiled through taxation and by periodic cycles of inflation and deflation, two types of spoliation for which the government is responsible. We must fight against these forms of spoliation and we await with impatience the support in this fight of all those who respect the principles and balance of society.
Subscribe