LETTER OF SUBMITTAL CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, JOINT COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL REVENUE TAXATION, Hon. ROBERT L. DOUGHTON, Chairman, Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation, MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means Relative to Proposed Tax Revision, of which Hon. Fred M. Vinson is chairman, has recommended in its report of January 14, 1938, that the codification of internal-revenue laws, which is submitted herewith, be enacted as soon as possible into absolute law. The need for enactment into absolute law of a codification of internal-revenue laws has long been recognized. The last such enactment was in 1874, when the Revised Statutes were adopted. In speaking of the need for such an enactment at that time, Senator Carpenter made the following statement on the floor of the Senate: Undoubtedly there will be found errors in this revision. There never was a revision made, as the Senator from New York has said, that did not have errors. It is not in the nature of things that the revision of so many statutes should be absolutely perfect. All that we can do is to give it every guaranty that such a work ever can have that it is correct. The great benefit of it is that it gives us a starting point for the law, and if errors are discovered, as undoubtedly there will be more or less, they are to be corrected by subsequent legislation, and every man, every citizen, every lawyer, every judge, knows what he has got to start with to find what the law is. He is to start with that volume, and then subsequent legislation is all he has got to discover. Tell any common man in the complicated relations of official life, who is an internal-revenue collector, if you please, or has something to do with the distillery business, that he is supposed to know all the law on that subject, and it is to be found in 17 volumes, and he is to be indicted if he omits a single particular or mistakes a single provision, and he would as soon go to the insane asylum at once as attempt to wade through it. Now, then, he has got a start; he has got the statute of revision; and then he has got to look to subsequent legislation and nothing else, and is certain he has all the enactments on the subject before him. (Restated, Congressional Record, vol. 64, p. 3139.) If the need for enactment as absolute law of a codification was recognized in 1874, when only 17 volumes of the Statutes at Large had been published and our internal revenue was derived almost entirely from taxes on liquor and tobacco, that need must be much greater today, when 33 additional volumes of the Statutes at Large have been published and our internal revenue is derived from more than a hundred separate sources. The United States Code is itself the culmination of more than 30 years' effort. Due to the mass of legislation contained in that code, it was thought best by the Congress to put it through a testing period before its enactment into absolute law. It was, therefore, made prima facie law only and scrutiny of it was invited for the purpose of correcting errors, eliminating obsolete matter, and restatement. The review and correction of the internal-revenue title was begun by the writer and Mr. L. L. Stratton, of the staff, after the enactment of the Revenue Act of 1928, and occupied a considerable portion of their time for the next 2 years. In this undertaking, valuable assistance was rendered by officials of the Treasury Department and the Legislative Reference Division of the Library of Congress, in making suggestions and reviewing the subject matter. The first edition of the work was published in 1930, and the second edition in 1933. This second edition was substituted for title 26 of the United States Code and in its present form is, therefore, prima facie law. It has now been nearly 14 years since the United States Code was enacted as prima facie law and nearly 8 years since the internalrevenue title substitute was prepared by the staff of the joint committee. However, because the internal-revenue title is only prima facie, and not absolute, law, it cannot be relied upon and it is still necessary to go to the many volumes of the Statutes at Large to determine what the law actually is. The great mass of internal-revenue legislation since 1873, scattered through 33 volumes of the Statutes at Large, makes such a recourse an exceedingly difficult undertaking, even for the most experienced lawyer. Statutes are repeated in subsequent acts in almost identical language, with no reference to prior acts or any expressed intention to amend or repeal. Provisions of a permanent character are included in riders and provisos and are hidden in various acts. Amendments are often involved and obscure. Inconsistencies and duplications abound. The only practical way to insure the certainty of determining what is actually the law is to have the internal-revenue code enacted into absolute law, as was done with the Revised Statutes of 1873. It is believed that it has had a sufficient testing period to make it reasonably acceptable as free from error. With this end in view, the staff of the joint committee, with the cooperation and assistance of the Treasury Department, has brought the internal-revenue code up to date. Under Secretary of the Treasury Magill stated in the hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means on the Revenue Revision of 1938 that the Treasury is vitally interested in this work and expressed the hope that the staff would be able to complete the work in time for the codification to be approved at this session of Congress. In the preparation of this work, he made available the services of the personnel of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, who have shown splendid cooperation and rendered valuable assistance. In the Chief Counsel's office the work was in charge of Mr. F. C. Lusk, head of the Legislation and Regulations Division, who assigned the work to Mr. Alfred B. Haupt, attorney, with Mr. E. B. Powell, detailed to the Chief Counsel's office, assisting. All the material was cleared through Mr. Haupt. The following rendered principal assistance in the units and divisions indicated: Income Tax Unit: Bannard Blake, assistant head, Rules and Regulations Division. Frederick K. Slanker. Chester A. Bennett. Alcohol Tax Unit: J. M. Williamson, Chief Counsel. V. Simonton, Assistant Chief Counsel. O. N. Forrest, Special Assistant to Chief Counsel. Dr. O. V. Emery, senior attorney. A. H. Hoch, field office legal adviser. A. C. Billard, Chief, Personnel and Supply Division. Miscellaneous Tax Unit: M. E. Hoyt, head, Sales Tax Division. A. L. Horner. A. M. Blaisdell, Chief, Adjustment Section, Estate Tax Division. R. K. Srygley. E. A. Ruth. C. W. Stewart, head, Capital Stock Tax Division. LeRoy Rogers, head, Tobacco Division. N. T. Morsell, Chief. Rulings and Correspondence Section, Tobacco Division. J. M. McKenna, Chief, Rulings Section, Sales Tax Division. W. E. Dodge. F. A. Katon. C. E. Sipes. R. E. Glessner. I. B. Petersen. M. F. Snider, head, Processing Tax Division. J. P. Drach, head, Bituminous Coal and Silver Tax Division. Accounts and Collections Unit: I. O. Miller, head, Collection Accounting Division. G. G. Davis, head, Collectors' Personnel Equipment and Space Division. R. F. Dolan, head, Disbursement Accounting Division. Administrative Division: F. I. Evans, head. Personnel Division: J. E. Lynch, assistant head. Miss E. P. Cox, Chief, Field Personnel Section. Social Security Tax Unit: L. E. Allison, technical assistant. Acknowledgment is made of helpful suggestions received from Mr. W. H. McClenon, of the Legislative Reference Division of the Library of Congress. In the preparation of the code by the writer and Mr. Stratton, valued assistance was rendered by Mr. Weaver Myers, Mr. W. L. Wallace, and other members of the staff. Approved: L. H. PARKER, Chief of Staff. COLIN F. STAM, Counsel. |