Changes

After the Civil War, the growing industrial and financial markets of the eastern United States generally prospered. But the farmers of the south and west suffered from low prices for their farm products, while they were forced to pay high prices for manufactured goods. Throughout the 1860s, 1870s, and 1880s, farmers formed such political organizations as the Grange, the Greenback Party, the National Farmers’ Alliance, and the People’s (Populist) Party. All of these groups advocated many reforms (see the Interstate Commerce Act) considered radical for the times, including a graduated income tax.  

After the Civil War, the growing industrial and financial markets of the eastern United States generally prospered. But the farmers of the south and west suffered from low prices for their farm products, while they were forced to pay high prices for manufactured goods. Throughout the 1860s, 1870s, and 1880s, farmers formed such political organizations as the Grange, the Greenback Party, the National Farmers’ Alliance, and the People’s (Populist) Party. All of these groups advocated many reforms (see the Interstate Commerce Act) considered radical for the times, including a graduated income tax.  

In 1894, as part of a high tariff bill, Congress enacted a 2-percent tax on income over $4,000. The tax was almost immediately struck down by a five-to-four decision of the Supreme Court, even though the Court had upheld the constitutionality of the Civil War tax as recently as 1881. Although farm organizations denounced the Court’s decision as a prime example of the alliance of government and business against the farmer, a general return of prosperity around the turn of the century softened the demand for reform. Democratic Party Platforms under the leadership of three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, however, consistently included an income tax plank, and the progressive wing of the Republican Party also espoused the concept.

In 1894, as part of the Wilson-Gorman tariff bill, Congress enacted a 2-percent tax on income over $4,000. The tax in 1895 was struck down by a five-to-four decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in ''Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.'' It held unconstitutional any direct tax by Congress on income.  A tax on income derived from property was a ''direct tax'' which Congress could impose only by the rule of apportionment according to population pursuant to Article I, Secs. 2 and 9 of the Constitution.  The ''Pollock'' decision was a surprise because merely 15 years earlier the Supreme Court had unanimously upheld a similar tax during the Civil War, the only other time that Congress had tried to tax income directly.

 

 

Although radicals denounced the Court’s decision as a prime example of the alliance of government and business against the farmer, a general return of prosperity around the turn of the century softened the demand for reform. Democratic Party Platforms under the leadership of three-time Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, however, consistently included an income tax plank, and the progressive wing of the Republican Party also espoused the concept.

In 1909 progressives in Congress again attached a provision for an income tax to a tariff bill. Conservatives, hoping to kill the idea for good, proposed a constitutional amendment enacting such a tax; they believed an amendment would never received ratification by three-fourths of the states. Much to their surprise, the amendment was ratified by one state legislature after another, and on February 25, 1913, with the certification by Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, the 16th amendment took effect. Yet in 1913, due to generous exemptions and deductions, less than 1 percent of the population paid income taxes at the rate of only 1 percent of net income.  

In 1909 progressives in Congress again attached a provision for an income tax to a tariff bill. Conservatives, hoping to kill the idea for good, proposed a constitutional amendment enacting such a tax; they believed an amendment would never received ratification by three-fourths of the states. Much to their surprise, the amendment was ratified by one state legislature after another, and on February 25, 1913, with the certification by Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, the 16th amendment took effect. Yet in 1913, due to generous exemptions and deductions, less than 1 percent of the population paid income taxes at the rate of only 1 percent of net income.  

After ''Pollock'' the Court did uphold creative taxation by Congress based on a theory that they were levied on mere "incidents of ownership" and thus were constitutional excise taxes:  (1) an inheritance tax, (2) a tax affixing revenue stamps to memoranda for the sale of merchandise on commodity exchanges, (3) a war revenue tax upon tobacco being resold, and (4) a corporate income tax as an excise "measured by income" justified by the privilege of doing business in corporate form.  

After ''Pollock'' the Court did uphold creative taxation by Congress based on a theory that they were levied on mere "incidents of ownership" and thus were constitutional excise taxes:  (1) an inheritance tax, (2) a tax affixing revenue stamps to memoranda for the sale of merchandise on commodity exchanges, (3) a war revenue tax upon tobacco being resold, and (4) a corporate income tax as an excise "measured by income" justified by the privilege of doing business in corporate form.