Table 5 Average income of dentists according to type of practice organization or employment, 1970. The standard deviation is a measure of absolute variability it is calculated by summing the squares of the deviations of the individual replies from the mean, dividing by the number of replies and extracting the square root of the quotient thus obtained The coefficient of variation is a measure of relative variability it is calculated by dividing the standard deviation by the mean and multiplying by 100 The standard error of the mean is a measure of sampling error It is calculated by dividing the standard deviation by the square root of the number of replies minus one The chances are 68 out of 100 that the true mean lies within the range of the sample mean plus or minus one standard error, assuming the sample is not biased Table 7 Average 1970 income of self-employed, incorporated, and salaried dentists, by region. Figures 2 and 3 indicate the relationship between income and the dentist's opinion of his level of busyness. Respondents were asked: "How long did your average patient have to wait for the initial appointment of a series (excluding emergencies)?" The responding dentists reported that their average income increased with the length of patient wait up to three or four weeks. Likewise, dentists who provided care for all patients who requested it, even though they felt rushed in doing so, reported higher incomes than those who could not provide care for all patients requesting it. Of course, there are many factors of individual differences that are also pertinent to the dentist's income level-among which are individual differences in skill, work methods, and overall practice efficiency; in addition to these, there is the individual dentist's perception of how much he can accomplish in a given amount of time. If a dentist underestimates his capabilities, Fig 3 Mean income (in thousands of dollars) of independent dentists according to busyness Key: (1) Too busy to treat all people requesting appointments (2) Provided dental care for all who requested appointments, but felt overworked (too rushed or worked too many hours). (3) Provided dental care for all who requested appointments, had enough patients, and did not feel overworked. (4) Not busy enough -would have liked more patients. this may be a limiting factor on his income. Dentists located in cities of 25,000 to 100,000 population had a higher average net and gross income than those in larger or smaller communities (Table 8). Income data were also tabulated for dentists practicing in the five largest cities. New York city accounted for nearly 6% of the 1970 sample, and the other four cities from 1% to 2% each. The largest means were reported from Los Angeles-a net income of $36,350 and gross of $77,510. Dentists practicing in Chicago reported surprisingly small means of $23,338 (net income) and $45,354 (gross). Table 9 shows the income of dentists according to age. For independent dentists, net income increased with each age group, reaching a peak in Table 8 Average income of independent dentists by size of city and average income of independent dentists for five large cities, 1970. the 45- to 49-year age group. Thereafter, net income decreased with each successive age group. Gross income followed the same pattern except that peak gross earnings were reached in the 40- to 44-year age group. Salaried dentists The 1970 mean net income of salaried dentists in the United States was $18,376, up 14.8% from $16.006 in 1967. Table 3 shows that 17.4% of the salaried dentists earned less than $10,000 in 1970. The median income of salaried dentists was $18,000. The top 15.7% of salaried dentists netted more than $25,000. Dentists on the staff of a dental school were paid a higher average salary ($20,927) than those employed by another dentist ($18,203). Perhaps a larger proportion of the latter group worked only part of the year. Regionally, salaried dentists' mean income was highest in the Southwest ($22,732) and lowest in New England ($16,187), as shown in Table 7. As in other types of dental employment, salaried dentists' net income increased with age, reaching a peak in the 45- to 49-year group, and declining slightly thereafter (Table 9). National dental bill The gross income reported by dentists in this study indicates that the national dental bill in 1970 was $4.8 billion, up 30% from 1967. Earlier dental practice surveys yielded estimates of $3.7 billion in 1967, $2.9 billion in 1964, $2.4 billion in 1961, $2.0 billion in 1958, $1.6 billion in 1955, and $1.3 billion in 1952. The current figure of $4.8 billion is an estimate of total fees collected by approximately 90,000 dentists in independent practice in 1970. These estimates do not include various governmental and philanthropic dental expenditures, and take into account the relatively high response from areas and groups of dentists with higher-than-average incomes. The civilian population in the United States on July 1, 1970, was estimated at 201,647,000 by the Bureau of the Census. Application of this to the $4.8 billion figure indicates that per capita expenditure for dental care in 1970 was $23.80, up 26% from the $18.90 per capita estimate in 1967. STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION The American Library Association is a not-for-profit educational organization having about 30,000 libraries, librarians, library trustees, and other individuals as members. The purpose of the American Library Association is to promote the development of library resources and services and their fullest utilization by scientists, scholars, students, researchers and other members of the public in every walk of life throughout the United States. With the information explosion placing unprecedented demands on the capacity of libraries to serve the public, more than ever before it is imperative that qualified, competent, trained personnel be attracted into librarianship, and particularly into school and public library systems. If employment in such systems as a librarian involves sacrifice of legal rights or benefits enjoyed by librarians and others employed outside such systems, the American Library Association is deeply concerned that the educational and social purposes of libraries will be adversely affected. It is because of this concern that ALA desires to record its views on HR 12272, entitled the "Individual Retirement Benefits Act." Manifestly, librarians and library employees, like all other workers, are deeply concerned with providing for their security after retirement. At present, the status of many public retirement systems covering library employees under Section 401 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 is uncertain. Hence, the limitation of the application of HR 12272 to plans qualified under Section 401(a) appears to discriminate against such systems and their participants. To alleviate this discrimination we would urge that HR 12272 be amended either to delete the requirement of qualification under Section 401 (a) or, if deemed appropriate, to substitute in lieu of such requirement a provision under which public plans may secure qualification under uniform standards and criteria. A second area of critical concern involves those provisions of HR 12272 which would limit the amount which would be deductible by librarians and other public employees who are not covered by Social Security. Such provisions compound the disadvantages already suffered by such employees because of their ineligibility for Social Security coverage, and cannot help but discourage the entry of qualified persons into the public and school library service field. A final problem area which is observed is the fact that even under HR 12272 the mandatory contributions of public employees, including librarians, to public retirement systems are includable in the gross income of the employee. We believe that HR 12272 should be amended to provide for an exclusion of mandatory contributions to public retirement systems from the taxable income of employees until they are received by the contributor, either at retirement or upon withdrawal from the system. STATEMENT OF AMERICAN LIFE CONVENTION AND LIFE INSURANCE The American Life Convention and the Life Insurance Association of America have an aggregate membership of 360 life insurance companies which hold 99 percent of the reserves of insured pension plans in the United States. We appreciate this opportunity to express our views on tax proposals affecting private pension plans. Our comments will be directed to the provisions included in the Administration's proposal-the "Individual Retirement Benefits Act of 1971"-as embodied in H.R. 12272. GENERAL STATEMENT OF POSITION Our associations support reasonable measures which will encourage the growth and expansion of the private retirement system and which will increase the effectiveness of this system in fulfilling the needs and expectations of covered participants. On the whole, we believe that H.R. 12272 represents a significant step towards achieving these objectives and we support its enactment. However, we believe that certain revisions in particular provisions of the bill would aid materially in achieving the desired objectives. These are discussed below. We realize, of course, that other proposals for legislation affecting private pension plans may be presented to the Committee. In considering such proposals, we urge that the Committee keep in mind the importance of maintaining a vital and dynamic system of private pension plans. These plans, together with individual savings, insurance and Social Security, have the function of providing for |