| F oundation Digs Up Pies anf | f fk B . Yeap etd Af £ ‘ > . | e s 6 . A! 2 Soak the Rich? No—Too Few’ in Utah A “soak-the- rich” income fax l\law might have some people. would be But an appeal to in Utah IF THE hypothetical | songs All. this revenue, except a relatively small amount needed cation were lowered tion expense, was placed in the for 28 weeks it for administrative and collec- the revenue would wholly unrealistic for the simple reason that there are not enough rich to to $5,000, be enough of operation—a Uniform School Fund for dis- little more than half a year. The report said that only) tribution to local school dis- 5 per cent of individuals filing ‘| ‘This is pointed out in a re- tricts. ‘ 1957 income tax returns re-| lease Tuesday by the Utah of governmental Operations.” Individual income tax collections in Utah during the last fiscal year totaled $11,- 454,660. \ The report said a study has property shown that states with a general withholding law affecting Illustrating its main point, the Foundation explained that complete confiscation of all individual incomes have a con- form tax. tenths mills of a statewide taxable income above Utah would bring.in additional revenue to the state government 16 weeks. siderably higher average in- come than those without such $9,000 in a law. Eight of the 10 enacting enough such laws subsequently upped operate their tax rates. In most cases for only the increases were greatest at the lower income levels. Re in the 9 and one © than $9,000, - O of more wo low income levels,” the report \said, “the state must rely chiefly on taxes collected from those in the lower income brackets to pay for the cost last year ‘to levy an additional tee “Because of Utah’s relatively tM tion. The report said if this reve- ported taxable incomes | of | nue had not been available it more than $5,000, and only 2 would have been. necessary | per cent had taxable incomes =_— Foundation, a private, nonprofit tax research organiza- BO Cad ‘| soak.