Page 4-Wednesday, May 2, 1979-The Michigan Daily 4michigan DAILY Eighty-eight Years of Editorial Freedom 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mi. 48109 Vol. LXXXIX, No. 1-S News Phone: 764-0552 Wednesday, May2;, 1979 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Chief's term OK as is Pauper's loophole 1 R ECENTLY, President Carter voiced sup- port for the idea of a single six-year term for the chief executive. Mr. Carter said he was con- cerned that the American public could not discern between presidential actions motivated by regard for the public good and those aimed at returning him to office. We feel that public support for Mr. Carter in- dicates the public good is being served. Likewise, if his actions breed widespread discontent, it is doubtful that they are beneficial. The four-year renewable term- was wisely designed with accountability in mind. If the chief executive did not have to face the voters once again, their needs might not command his ex- pedient attention. Presently, Mr. Carter must reckon with powerful business and labor interests in addition to the less influential parties. While it is clear that the president would still have to reckon with those groups if he could not run again, the impetus to minimize alienation would be reduced. In fact, it- would be even easier to act in the interest of the heavyweights while neglecting the needs of powerless citizens if their votes were no longer needed. So, the change would probably not benefit the latter. Regrettably, a substantial portion of Mr. Car- ter's time and energy has already been consumed by his 1980 campaign. And we cannot rule out the possibility that politics were foremost in mind when he pushed the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty or behind the intermittent emphasis on national, health insurance. But concern for popularity also forced the editing of hiA energy speech during the Three Mile Island debacle, omitting extensive pro-nuclear passages. While politics arouses the public's suspicion, that ingredient also holds the president accountable. Taxpayers bear part of the campaign costs when presidential speeches and visits thinly veil political plugs for the president and other party members. While it is unfortunate that support is awarded without sanction, at least public finan- cing laws ensure the incumbent is no longer the sole benefactor. Mr. Carter, whose 1980 campaign is already being field-tested in key primary states, has not yet declared his candidacy. But in order to hold the president accountable to all sectors of the citizenry, the present provisions should not be changed. Politics are the price of populism. SPRING EDITORIAL STAFF By Prank Browning once'a weeA, a smal group of people in Billings. Montana, meets to discuss strategies for a revolt against the government of the United states. These ranchers and storekeepers are not anarchists or terrorists. They are the descendants of a grand American tradition-tax rebels who believe that government taxation is little more than blatant confiscation of private property to feed the in- satiable appetites of Washington. MARTIN BECKMAN, leader of the Montana group-Americans for Constitutional Gover- nment-counsels followers that they have a constitutional right to protect their incomes from government confiscation. "You only have those rights you demand," he says. "You use those rights or you lose them. Our founding fathers were all tax rebels." Though the IRS and the federal courts strongly disagree, Beck- man's group, and others like it, are thriving in virtually every section of the country. John Davidson, director of the National Taxpayers Union, estimates that some 10 million Americans have refused to pay or avoid paying lederal income taxs-10 times the number the IRS claims to have caught. A good portion of that number represents middle-class professionals and business executives who have discovered a variety of sophisticated schemes to avoid paying some or all of their taxes. But the largest portion is believed to represent those who can survive only by working in the so-called "un- derground economy", an economy that functions totally on cash and in 1977 produced some $195 billion, or ten per cent of the entire gross national product, ac- cording to economist Peter Gut- mann of Baruch College of the City University of New York. None of that income was taxed, because none of it was declared. ACCORDING rO Business Week magazine, this un- derground economy "may be the fastest growing segment of U.S. society.".It claims that the taxes not paid on underground income would be nearly enough to wipe out the federal budget deficit. Who are these underground workers? Some are illegally em- ployed-white-collar extor- tionists, con artists, prostitutes, and dope dealers. But most are simply honest, lower and middle- class American workers for whom there are no tax loopholes and who are struggling to fight inflation by working at jobs, or moonlighting at second jobs, where no taxes are collected and where earnings are paid in cash. Such jobs include freelance hoasepainting and carpentry, flea market vending, yard work, auto repair, dome-tic work, and scores of other service-type jobs. The category might also include a portion of cash-paid professional services, such as those of doctors, dentists, writers or accountants. "OUll THEORY", said a representative of Chase Econometric Associates, a sub- sidiary of the Chase Manhattan Bank, "and I must emphasize that it is still a theory, is that Americans are returning to self- employment as a means of sup- port and not reporting the income to the government." If so, then Americans are following in the footsteps of the French, the English, the Italians, and the Japanese, for whom tax cheating is more the norm than the exception. The French gover- nment has estimated that as much as 25 per cent of the work force is engaged in moonlighting and pays notaxes on second jobs. Besides tax avoidance through non-reporting of income, there are a variety of legal means that the average worker can use to protect income from the IRS--methods everyd it as ac- ceptable as those used hy Ronald Reagan or Jimmy Carter. While some of them require middle- class privileges such as bank credit or credit cards, and the ability to work as a "consultant" rather than as a wage-earner, others are available to a wide spectrum of workers. One effective device discovered by many beleaguered families is the family cor- poration. These are simply small, hometown versions of U.S. Steel, Chase Manhattan anc Pan American Airways-none of which paid any income tax in 1976. THlE ONLY TAXES owed by family corporations are on profits and capital gains. If the family "business" fails to make a profit or reap any capital gains, then it cannot be taxed, though it provides numerous business deductions. The officers of the corporation may be members of the family and any others whom the incorporators wish to name. The key to the success of the family corporation is a careful assessment of the marketable skills of each family member. "Anyone who has expert knowledge in some field of en- deavor can become a consultant in that field," says Stephen Angell, an advisor to the War Resisters League. There fields can include sales. management, manufacturing and any number of endeavors which, if broadly in- terpreted, can relate to the family business. "For example," says Angell, '-manufacturing includes han- dmade articles, and management encompasses property management." such as a home which may be partially leased for residential purposes. The handmade crafts may be sold to friends and neighbors. "A proportionate share of all house expenses-insurance, repairs, heat, light, telephone, taxes, depreciation and mortgage in- terestbecomes a deductible business expense. "Family members who like pets may be paid a fee by the cor- poration each month to raise stock, which, when it reaches maturity, is offered on the market.'these expenses are deductible, Angell says, even if the "business" fails to make a profit for several years. Group life insurance, health in- surance. and IRS-approved retirement plans can also be removed from personal budgets and made deductible expenses by a family corporation. It' any conclusion can be derived from the records of the tax courts: it is that very few people need worry about getting slapped by !he harsh hand of the government, especially if t ey exercise common sense i avoiding taxes and do not flaunt their tax resistance. Frank Browning wrote this piece for Pacific News Service, of which he is a for- Iner editor. CIA KIS IttCIA 16 ffWRlsH! CIA 15 CNi~A4t'ZS s~KUYv .N AV*) 90 G r ' f~fCb , s i. hyA a b " o ~ 5 ELIZABETH SLOWIK Editor-in-chief JUDY RAKOWSKY Editorial Director JOSHUA PECK Arts Director MAUREENO'MALLEY LISA UDELSON Photographers STAFF WRITERS: Sara Anspach. Amy Diamond, Julie Engebrecht, John Goyer. 'Patricia Hagen, Vicki Henderso'n Adrieiite"Lyons, Beth Persky, John Sink- evics,.Tim Yagle...r _ ___.__-