Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
7773971
label
Taxes - Tax Reduction Act (3)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
7773971
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Taxes - Tax Reduction Act (3)
citationUrl
collections
John O. Marsh Files (Ford Administration)
John Marsh's General Subject Files
subjects
Legislation
Taxation
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
7773971
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-04-30
month
4
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1975-03-01
month
3
year
1975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
5428cb68329dd5c0
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 32, folder "Taxes - Tax Reduction Act (3)" of
the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 32 of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
MAR 3 1 1975
March 28, 1975
n
Dear Ken:
Thank you for your telegram urging that the
President veto H.R. 2166, the Tax Reduction
Act of 1975. I know that he will appreciate
receiving the benefit of your views, and I
shall see that they are called to his early
attention.
With kind regards,
Sincerely,
Vernon C. Loen
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Honorable J. Kenneth Robinson
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Yee w/ine to Counsellor Marsh - - FYI
bee w/inc to Jim Cannon for further handling
VCL:EF:jk
FORD & LIBRARY 9ERVLD
2
(
3-28
3
4
5
6
The Myste House
I
2
Washington
3
WHA099(1656) (1-36631A886) PD #3/27/75 1655
4
ICS IPMUAWA WSH
5
1975 MAR 27 PM 5 51
s
71066 GOVT BUWASHINGTON DC 10 03-27.551P EDT
7
PMS THE PRESIDENT
8
9
WHITE HOUSE DC
TO
A VETO OF THE TAX BILL WOULD HAVE MY SUPPORT.
11
12
REP J KENNETH ROBINSON.
13
14
15 NNNN
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
FORD i 07V830 LIBRARY
MAR 3 1 1975
March 28, 1975
Dear Bill:
u
Thank you for your telegram urging that the
President veto H.R. 2166, the Tax Reduction
Act of 1975. I know that he will appreciate
receiving the benefit of your views, and I
shall see that they are called to his early
attention.
With kind regards,
Sincerely,
Vernon C. Loen
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Honorable Bill Archer
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
w/inc to Counsellor Marsh - FYI
bee w/inc to Jim Cannon - for further handling
VCL:EF:jk
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
not
328
,
5
-
The Tatle House
6
1
Washington
X
2
3
WHB WHB083(1505) (2-032310E086)PD 03/27/75 1505
4
1975 MAR 27 PM 4 01
(
5
ICS IPMBNGZ CSP
6
7
7132264941 TDBN HOUSTON TX 27 03-27 0305P EST
8
PMS PRESIDENT GERALD R FORD
9
WHITE HOUSE DC
10
11 I STRONGLY URGE YOU TO VETO THE HOUSE TAX REBATE BILL I FEEL THAT WE
12
MUST PLACE THIS ACTION SQUARELY ON THE SHOULDERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC
13
14 CONGRESS
15
CONGRESSMAN BILL ARCHER
16
(
17
1024 LONGWORTH BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20515
18
NNNN
19
C 20
21
22
2
23
24
25
( 26
FORD is LIBRARY GERVID
MAR 31 1975
March 28, 1975
M
Dear John:
Thank you for your telegram urging that the
President veto H.R. 2166, the Tax Reduction
Act of 1975. I know that he will appreciate
receiving the benefit of your views, and I
shall see that they are called to his early
attention.
With kind regards,
Sincerely,
Vernon C. Loen
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Honorable John Y. NcCollister
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Lice w/inc to Counsellor Marsh - FYI
bee w/inc to Jim Cannon - for further handling
VCL:EF:jk
FORD is LIBRARY
3- 27
$
litte House
5
1
firston
2
3
WHB 062(1224) (1-$162 086)PD 03/27/75 1222
4
,975 MAR PM I 22
5 ICS IPMJAWA WSH
6
11025 GOVT BUWASHINGTON DC 44 03-27 116P EDT
7
%
PMS HONORABLE GERALD R FORD THE PRESIDENT
9
WHITE HOUSE DC
10
11 MR PRESIDENT. UURGE YOU TO VETO THE TAX REDUCTION ACT.
12
THROUGH ITS VOTES FOR MASSIVE NEW SPENDING PROGRAMS AND ITS
13
14. INCLUSION OF ILL-CONSIDERED, FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN OUR TAX LAWS,
15
CONGRESS HAS ACTED IRRESPINSIBLY. URGE YOUR LEADERSHIP TO DRAMATIZE
16
17 FOLLY OF BIG DEFICITS.
18
JOHN Y MCCOLLISTER MEMBER OF CONGRESS.
19
20
21
NNNN
22
23
24
25
)
26
GERALE FORD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
ROBERT K WOLTHUIS
FOR:
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF RKW
SUBJECT:
Tax Reduction Bill
Congressman Herman Schneebeli (R-PA) just called to report on
the public reaction in his District to his vote against the
tax reduction bill.
He said he met this morning with 20 leading businessmen from
a five county area. In the course of the meeting, he asked
what they thought the President should do with the bill.
Every one of them said the President should veto it.
He has received four phone calls today from people who had
read in the local paper Mr. Schneebeli's reasons for voting
against the bill, and they all agreed. He says people in
the street have come up to him to congratulate him on his
vote.
Mr. Schneebeli says he is certain the public will support
the President if he vetoes the bill, and that many Members
of the House will work hard on the Floor to sustain a veto.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
ROBERT K WOLTHUIS RKW
SUBJECT:
Tax Bill
Barber Conable called early this afternoon and said he now
feels that you should veto the tax bill for the following
reasons.
1. Republican support in the House will be damaged if the
bill is not vetoed.
2. Republican Members would not take other vetoes seriously
especially on smaller spending bills.
3. The 125 who had the courage to vote against the bill may
feel their votes W
in vain.
4. The bill is highly inflationary and gives Conable the
feeling he is sailing on the Lusitania.
This is a hardening in Conable's position over the views he
expressed yesterday.
bcc: Rumsfeld
Marsh
MAY 1 1974
March 28, 1975
Dear Senator:
Thank you for your telegram urging that
President sign H.R. 2166, the Tax Reduction W
Act of 1975. I know that he will appreciate
receiving the benefit of your views, and I
shall see that they are called to his early
attention.
with kind regards,
Sincerely,
William T. Kendall
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Honorable Bob Dole
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
w/inc to Counsellor Marsh - - FYI
bee w/inc to Jim Cannon - for further handling
WTK:EF:jk
FORD & LIBRARY 07V830
2
3-28
3
4
5
6
The Thite House
2
Mashington
3
4
5
ICS IPMNAWA WSH
WHA#91(1229) (1-#13738A087)PD #3/28/75 1227 975 MAR 28 PM I 27
s
7
10029 GOVT NFWASHINGTON DC 144 #3-28 111P EDT
8
PMS THE PRESIDENT
9
10
WHITE HOUSE DC
CERALD ? FORD
11
I URGE YOU TO SIGN H. R. 2166, THE TAX REDUCTION ACT OF 1975.
12
13
WHILE THE BILL CONTAINS SOME QUESTIONABLE PROVISIONS, ON
14
BALANCE I BELIEVE IT WILL PROVIDE THE POSITIVE ECONOMIC STIMULUS
15
16
THAT IS SO URGENTLY REQUIRED TO END THE RECESSION AND PUT UNEMPLOYED
17
AMERICANS BACK TO WORK.
18
19
I SHARE YOUR CONCERN THAT WE MUST HOLD DOWN THE SIZE OF THE
20
FORM 0805 PRINTED BY THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY, U. 5
FEDERAL DEFICIT. AND AM HOPEFUL THAT CONGRESS WILL REFRAIN FROM
21
22
INITIATING NON-ESSENTIAL NEW GOVERNMENT SPENDING PROGRAMS. BUT
23
24
I ALSO BELIEVE THAT A VETO OF H. R. 2166 WILL, IN NO WAY, LEAD TO A
25
REDUCTION IN THE BUDGET DEFICIT. RATHER, IT COULD RESULT IN AN EVEN
26
LARGER, LESS MERITORIOUS BILL BEING PASSED BY THE CONGRESS.
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
ALMOST EVERYONE AGREES THAT THE TAX CUT IS NEEDED TODAY TO INCREASE
8
THE PURCHASING POWER OF EVERY AMERICAN. I URGE YOU TO GIVE YOUR
9
10
APPROVAL TO THE BILL WITHOUT DELAY
11
BOB DOLE USS
12
13
14
NNNN
15
16
17
18
19
20
FORD is GREATO LIBRARY
FORM 0805 PRINTED BY THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY U USA
21
22
23
24
25
26
MAR 29 1974
March 28, 1975
Dear Bob:
Thank you for your telegram urging that the
President vete H.R. 2166, the Tax Reduction
Act of 1975. I know that he will appreciate
receiving the benefit of your views, and I
shall see that they are called to his early
attention.
With kind regards,
Sincerely,
Vernon c. Loen
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Monorable Robert B. Bauman
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
(See w/inc to Counsellor Marsh - FYI
bee w/inc to Jim Cannon - for further handling
VCL:EF:jk
FORD i LIBRARY 07V838
2
)
3.
3-28
4
5
)
5
1
Shife Chouse
2
Washington
3
4
WH8 (0932) (1-805122A087)PD 03/28/75 0931
5
ICS IPMJAWA WSH
1975 MAR 28 AM 10 29
s
7
11003 GOVT BUWASHINGTON DC 56 03-28 949A EDT
8
PMS PRESIDENT GERALD FORD
9
10
WHITE HOUSE
2
11 WHITE HOUSE DC
12
13
REPORT THAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING A VETO OF THE TAX BILL
)
14
APPROVED WEDNESAY NIGHT HIGHLY ENCOURAGING.. THE EXCESSES
15
16.
OF THIS LEGISLATION ARE ALARMING. ITS INFLATIONARY IMPACT
X
17
WILL WREAK HAVOC. CREATING ECONOMIC DISLOCATION AND EVENTUAL
18
19
HARDSHIP FOR THE INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER. FAR OUTWEIGHT ING ANY
20 MINOR IMMEDIATE RELIEF.
21
22
23
MR PRESIDENT, I RESPECTFULLY URGE THAT YOU VETO
24
25
THIS DISASTROUS BILL
)
26
ROBERT E BAUMAN MEMBER OF CONGRESS
LIBRATY GERALD FORD ?
MAY 1 1974
March 28, 1975
Dear Senator:
M
Thank you for your telegram urging that the
President vote H.R. 2166, the Tax Reduction
Act of 1975. I know that he will appreciate
receiving the benefit of your views, and I
shall see that they are called to his early
attention.
with kind regards,
Sincerely,
William T. Kendall
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Honorable Mark 0. Hatfield
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
June w/inc to Counsellor Marsh - FYI
bee w/inc to Jim Cannon - for further handling
WTK:EF:jk
FORD & LIBRARY 07V839
3-28
MARK O. HATFIELD
OREGON
was Torp hill
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C.
March 28, 1975
Dear Mr. President:
I urge you to veto the tax bill now before
you. While parts of it will help in combating
the pressures of the recession and inflation,
its overall impact will create more problems
than it will solve.
ME
The deficit in the bill will haunt us in the
years ahead as a hidden tax. It will not
create the jobs we need, and could well trigger
another strong dose of inflation because of
the deficit.
The legislation puts money into one pocket of
a taxpayer, and then takes more money out of
the other pocket. Taxpayers who think we are
returning money to them will see its purchasing
power erode through inflation fueled by this
large deficit.
As one who opposed both the original Senate
bill and the Conference Report, I respectfully
urge that this legislation be vetoed. Thank
you for your consideration of these views.
Sincerely,
mus
The President
FORD : LIBRARY
The White House
Washington, D. C.
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Hatfued
The President
The White House
Washington, D. C.
MARK OREGON O. HATFIELD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
WILLIAM T. KENDALL
work
PATRICK E. O'DONNELL
POD
SUBJECT:
The Tax Reduction Act of 1975
The following 16 Senators voted against the Tax Reduction Conference Report:
Bartlett, Bellmon, Buckley, Fannin, Garn, Goldwater, Hansen, Helms,
Hruska, McClure, Scott (Va.), Thurmond, Tower, Young, Byrd (Va.),
Stennis.
The following 8 Senators were announced as absent but against the Conference
Report: Brock, Griffin, Hatfield, Laxalt, Eastland, Mansfield, McClellan,
Morgan. (The Mansfield report may be a Congressional Record misprint).
The following 4 Senators were absent but have informed us they would vote
to sustain a veto: Curtis, Packwood, Percy, Stevens.
Senator Scott (Pa.) voted for the Report but pledges to vote to sustain. Thus,
the total of committed Senators (to vote to sustain) is 29.
The following Senators are likely prospects:
Baker:
Says he "probably" would vote to sustain.
Fong:
Voted for the bill and was paired for the Report, but might
swing over.
Pearson:
Was absent, voted for the original bill. No word from him
on veto.
Roth:
Voted against original. For Conference Report. Wavering.
Allen:
Was absent, voted against original bill. Definitely a possibility.
Biden:
Absent, voted against bill, a remote possibility.
/
FORD
BERALD
Page 2
McGee:
Absent, voted for original bill, another remote possibility.
Nunn:
Absent, voted against original bill. Told us he "might" vote
to sustain, depending on the President's reasoning if he vetoed.
Sparkman:
Was absent on both votes, and is unknown.
In order to sustain, we need five of the above possibilities.
A personal note from Bill Kendall:
I believe we can get the necessary votes in the Senate to sustain a veto.
After reading the Wall Street Journal editorial today I lean against the
tax bill on economic grounds. However, on the political side I tend to
agree with Senator Griffin that a veto will present a public relations
problem in view of our campaign for a tax cut as soon as possible. There
is no doubt that we would have problems with Senator Long on future tax
bills and possibly the energy bills should the President veto the bill and it
is sustained. A call from the President to Senator Long is recommended
whether he signs or vetoes. Incidentally, I understand Bob Novak thinks the
President can defend a veto politically.
Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted
materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to
these materials.
The Washington Post -- Editorial Page
Friday, March 28, 1975
GERALD B. FORD
The Tax Bill
BY
THE TIME Congress finally passed the massive
converges. and where the runs are scored. But in this
tax reduction, it is doubtful that six members of
case, some of the amendments hung onto the tax bill
either house knew exactly what they were voting on.
were such wanton mischief that they seemed a deliberate
Most of them had no opportunity even to read the con-
attempt to provoke a veto and, one may speculate, pre-
ference's final version, which-fortunately-differed sub-
serve the depletion allowance. In any event, the Senate
stantially from those that the two houses had previously
as a whole passed most of the committee's work along
debated. It is too much to expect Congress to enact a
to the conference and left it up to Sen. Long's antagonists
tax bill of this magnitude in a cool and orderly fashion.
in that closed room to rescue the public interest. The
Taxation always stirs the passions at the Capitol. But
result is a bill that contains a great deal more than a
the past several weeks' level of confusion, and the rate
fiscal stimulus to the economy.
-1 which highly amendments being
10 regiel. nation ppobobly the mode i nort of
March 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JACK MARSH
Pat O'Donnell called this afternoon to report that he had talked with
Senator Paul Fannin about the tax bill.
Fannin apparently called to indicate his objection to the bill and the
fact that he would support you in a veto, but more importantly, to
report the very strong views of Senators Beall and Dole against
your vetoing the bill. Fannin says that Dole and Beall are so strongly
opposed to your veto that they have indicated if you sign the bill,
they will support you in your efforts to hold down future Federal
spending.
The tone of Senator Fannin's remarks was that the Dole and Beall
views carry some weight with him and, therefore, he would support
you either way you decide to go without strong views against a veto.
Doug Bennett of the House side called to say that he talked with Larry
Woodward of the Joint Committee and Woodward indicated his concern
about the temporary features in the bill becoming permanent. He told
Bennett he planned to make every effort to keep these as temporary
provisions only. He also told Bennett that in the reform bill he was
going to try to find ways to pick up additional revenues lost through
the tax bill.
Bennett also said he talked with Conable this merning and Barber
feels a number of Republicans will be concerned by a decision not
to vete the bill.
JOM/dl
FORDO is LIBRARY GERALD
March 29, 1975
MEMORANDUM TO:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
RUSS ROURKE
the following information:
Ken Davis (Hugh Scott's A. A.) called from Brussels to convey
Hugh Scott wanted to reinforce his previously stated position that
"the President should sign the tax bill". Davis felt that, with the
exception of Bill Scott, Hugh Scott's views were shared by all of
Hollings, Morgan and Culver.
the Senators on the European trip, vis., Javits, Humphrey, Leahy,
Davis stated that, if and when the President signed the bill,
Scott and the others would fully understand "If the President had
to take a shot at the Congress in his statement tonight".
Davis added that it was the view of the majority of the Senators
that only the imminence of the Easter recess kept the tax bill
from being even higher. If they had to go through this entire
exercise over again, with an open-ended time frame, Davis was
sure the ultimate bill would be far more costly.
RAR:cb
FORD is LIBRANT
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JACK MARSH
SUBJECT:
Tax Bill
Pursuant to your request, I am conveying to you some of my thoughts
and recommendations in reference to the pending tax bill as to whether
you should sign or veto.
As I explained to you personally, were I considering this bill as a Member
of Congress, I feel certain I would vote against it and I suspect you would
also. However, although this is a helpful insight, it cannot be a binding
criteria for the position in which you now find yourself where you repre-
sent a National constituency.
In approaching my recommendations, I have tried to establish some
criteria by which you should measure the bill from the standpoint of
a veto. This criteria is set out as follows:
To support a veto on legislation of this magnitude and
consequence, the bill must be totally unacceptable and
the unacceptability must be apparent, or capable of
being made apparent.
The elements to determine if this definition applies, are as follows:
a. Overwhelming Reason:
An examination of the Bill should lead an individual to
FORD
&
conclude its adverse features present an overwhelming
reason it should be vetoed as opposed to being signed.
LIBRAR
The growing Federal deficit lends itself to this argument
but I believe it is limited for your purposes for reasons
set out later in this paper.
-2-
b.
An Understandable Reason:
The adverse features that lead you to a veto should, in
addition to presenting an overwhelming reason, must also
be an understandable reason which is capable of being
explained otherwise the chances of sustaining the veto
and protecting your credibility are lost.
C. Relevancy and Significance:
The adverse features in support of a veto must be measures
of a significant nature and they must be relevant to the total
bill. Arguments in support of a veto on a lesser or insignifi-
cant provision, regardless of merit, will be irrelevant and
in the nature of nitpicking.
d. Integral Part of the Whole:
Those measures to which you object, in order to support a
decision to veto, must be so germane and so significant as
to go to the heart of the bill and make the whole measure
unacceptable.
e.
The Weight of the Facts:
It is essential that you be able to make a clear and convincing
case that you are right on the basis of the facts in support of
your veto when addressing objectionable features. If it is
merely debatable with strong points on either side, you should
sign the bill. For example, it is difficult to argue you feel
that measures will become permanent when the proposed
legislation clearly states they are temporary.
f.
The Veto reasons must be defensible against rebuttal:
This point is closely related to the proceeding one. If you
should decide to veto, then the case you make in the public
forum must be so strong as to resist rebuttal. There is a
question in my mind as to whether this test can be met.
FORD
-3-
is
Glaring Error:
If there is glaring error in the bill, which arose out of
mistake or misunderstanding. you can probably make
the easiest case in support of a veto. This type of
legislation lends itself to such a flaw and the housing
provision could be close to meeting such a criteria.
h. Veto Sustainability:
Finally, the practicalities of the situation cannot be
ignored. Can the veto be sustained and by what margin?
As of this time, I believe it can be sustained but it will
require a tremendous effort and even then, the margin
will, in my opinion, be less than 10 votes. A narrowly
sustained veto strains future Congressional action. A
failure to sustain would be a major setback. The
economic outlook as of the date of the vote would have
a substantial impact on the vote result. New employ-
ment statistics cannot be discounted in this regard.
In reviewing the proposed bill in light of the above tests, I am of the
view that notwithstanding its objectionable features, it should be signed.
I believe that we would concur in a strong veto message that points to
the objections and waves the caution flag for the future.
To me one of the best reasons to support a veto is what I term the
massive deficit reason which would argue that a tax reduction, coupled
with uncontrolled Congressional spending, will adversely impact on the
economy. Although I lean very strongly to this position, I recognize
that it is a veto with no tax bill as opposed to a veto with an improved
tax bill. I am doubtful you can select this option in light of the continued
emphasis and demand for a tax cut since the State of the Union Message.
We all agree that your credibility is a major factor in your decision. It
is for this reason that I also recommend signing the bill rather than
vetoing the same. There are realities and overriding practicalities
that drive your decision. This does not mean the principle must be
set aside but the test of principle on one or more objectionable features
of the entire bill must be weighed in terms of the overall measure on
national need as well as the future effectiveness of your Presidency.
It may be that by later today, or tomorrow morning, expressions of
public opinion will indicate support for a veto course, but I doubt it.
However, I suggest a careful examination today of editorial statements
- 4
as well as expressions of the financial, business and labor communities
as to their view of the legislation.
When you consider these, and the risk of an unsustained veto, or even
a sustained veto and the chance of a minimally improved bill, I feel the
arguments to sign outweigh those to veto.
Finally, you should assess the position of the Republicans who voted
against the bill, particularly the House Leadership. Special attention
must be given to them to assure they understand the compelling reasons
that led to your decision to sign if that is the course you take.
THE WHITE HOUSE
THE WHITE HOUSE
11:53 am
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
March 29, 1975
March 29, 1975
1:48 p.m.
MR. MARSH:
FYI - Susan Porter saw former
MR. MARSH:
Congressman David Dennis last
David Dennis called - made
night. He suggested the President
reference to the Wall Street
read yesterday's Wall Street Jour-
nal (the President did see this),
Journal article if the President
and then VETO the bill.
would VETO - Dennis will
publicly support him. Mr.
connie
Dennis feels this is very
important to the future of this
Country.
connie
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 29, 1975
9:21 a. m.
MR. MARSH:
Congressman Dickinson
called said to tell the
President to VETO the
tax bill. There are
FORD 3 LIBRARY QERALD
enough votes in the House
to sustain the veto - forget
the "politics" of the thing!
connie
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 29, 1975
10:41 a.m.
MR. MARSH:
Vern Loen called with the following:
Rep. Mosher (R-Ohio) said to SIGN
Rep. Hyde (R-Ill) said to VETO
Rep. Montgomery (D-Miss) said to VETO
(people in his district are far ahead of Congress)
Rep. Frenzel (R-Minn) said to VETO
connie
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
10T hill
FORD LIBRARY is GERALD
SECRET
Results of Member Notification that President would sign Tax Cut Bill on 3/29/75
Speaker Carl Albert
Telephoned by Vern Loen to U.S. Mission in Peking
and left message with duty officer for delivery to
Speaker.
John J. Rhodes
Minority Leader - telephoned by Vern Loen to U.S.
Mission in Peking and left message with duty officer
for delivery to Mr. Rhodes.
Tip O'Neill
Majority Leader - telephoned by Leppert in Athens,
Greece. Was pleased that President decided to sign
tax cut bill and said "that's great."
John McFall
Majority Whip - telephoned by Vern Loen. Said
"President was doing right thing in signing the tax
bill."
Bob Michel
Minority Whip Vern Loen telephoned, no direct
contact, his telephone out of order. Message left
with his secretary, Sharon Yard who stated she
would inform Mr. Michel.
Herman Schneebeli
Ranking Min ority - Ways and Means Committee.
Telephoned by Leppert, stated the President had a
tough decision and felt the President would do what
he had to do and that he understood that.
John Anderson
Chairman - - House Republican Conference.
Telephoned by Leppert in Athens, Greece. Anderson
felt President made the right decision and would
respect the embargo.
A1 Ullman
Chairman - - Ways and Means
Doug Bennett reached him in Jacksonville, Fla. His
reaction was very favorable, very pleased with the
President's decision. Expressed his intention to
eliminate the "load" provisions of the bill (in agree-
ment with the President).
Barber Conable
Second Ranking Republican - Ways and Means (conferee)
Doug Bennett reached him at home in Washington.
He was disappointed but under stood the apparent
reasoning behind the President's decision. Commented
that "He will always be my President."
Determined to be an administrative marking
FORD is 938839 LIBRARY
Cancelled per E.O. 12356, Sec. 1.3 and
Archivist's memo of March 16, 1983
By
AAD NARS date 1/16/86
SECRET
2
Joe Waggonner
- Ways and Means Democrat.
Doug Bennett reached him in Athens, Greece. He
felt the President's decision was a wise one. Was
glad the President was coming down hard on the
budget deficit prospects.
Phil Landrum
- Ways and Means Democrat (conferee)
Doug Bennett reached him in Georgia. Pleased with
President's decision. Felt it was the wisest course.
Again expressed his feeling that if vetoed, a second
bill could cost more than $30 B.
Dan Rostenkowski
- Ways and Means Democrat (conferee)
Doug Bennett reached him in Chicago. Very pleased
with President's decision. Again expressed opinion
that Congress must now cooperate and compromise
with the President.
FORD in GERALD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON sut 3/29
Cy -tay also bill
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
SECRET
Determined to be an administrative ma 18
Cancelled per E.O. 12356, Sec. 1.3 and
Archivist's memo of March 16, 1983
By
AMP NARS date 1/16/86
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 31, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
WILLIAM T. KENDALL
has
PATRICK E. O'DONNELL
SUBJECT:
Tax Bill Notification and Vietnam Announce-
ment reaction
TAX BILL NOTIFICATION
Eastland
"O.K."
Robert Byrd
"Thank you for the courtesy"
Hansen
Thank you--it was a hard decision and I
support him either way. Said he would
honor the 7:30 embargo and also the one
placed on the President's choice for Secretary
of Interior. We thought it was our office,
not Walker's, that conveyed such news!
Fannin
Fine--"would have supported the President
either way"
Griffin (Mexico)
Agreed with signing. Was to inform Mansfield.
Long
Could not reach before speech. Press reports
say he was pleased with action.
VIETNAM ANNOUNCEMENT
Stennis
"Good Decision; I support"
Thurmond
"O.K., thanks"
McClellan
Could not reach
FORD & LIBRARY
Seat
Page 2
Young
"Thank you"
Eastland
Would support intervention. Pleased that
the President made the move.
Robert Byrd
Thinks it is all right
Case
Thanked us for informing him--no comment.
Sparkman
Thought President did the right thing.
FORD is LIBRARY DERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 28, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
work
FROM:
WILLIAM T. KENDALL
PATRICK E. O'DONNELL
POD
SUBJECT:
The Tax Reduction Act of 1975
The following 16 Senators voted against the Tax Reduction Conference Report:
Bartlett, Bellmon, Buckley, Fannin, Garn, Goldwater, Hansen, Helms,
Hruska, McClure, Scott (Va.), Thurmond, Tower, Young, Byrd (Va.),
Stennis.
The following 8 Senators were announced as absent but against the Conference
Report: Brock, Griffin, Hatfield, Laxalt, Eastland, Mansfield, McClellan,
Morgan. (The Mansfield report may be a Congressional Record misprint).
The following 4 Senators were absent but have informed us they would vote
to sustain a veto: Curtis, Packwood, Percy, Stevens.
Senator Scott (Pa.) voted for the Report but pledges to vote to sustain. Thus,
the total of committed Senators (to vote to sustain) is 29.
The following Senators are likely prospects:
Baker:
Says he "probably" would vote to sustain.
Fong:
Voted for the bill and was paired for the Report, but might
swing over.
Pearson:
Was absent, voted for the original bill. No word from him
on veto.
Roth:
Voted against original. For Conference Report. Wavering.
Allen:
Was absent, voted against original bill. Definitely a possibility.
Biden:
Absent, voted against bill, a remote possibility.
Page 2
McGee:
Absent, voted for original bill, another remote possibility.
Nunn:
Absent, voted against original bill. Told us he "might" vote
to sustain, depending on the President's reasoning if he vetoed.
Sparkman:
Was absent on both votes, and is unknown.
In order to sustain, we need five of the above possibilities.
A personal note from Bill Kendall:
I believe we can get the necessary votes in the Senate to sustain a veto.
After reading the Wall Street Journal editorial today I lean against the
tax bill on economic grounds. However, on the political side I tend to
agree with Senator Griffin that a veto will present a public relations
problem in view of our campaign for a tax cut as soon as possible. There
is no doubt that we would have problems with Senator Long on future tax
bills and possibly the energy bills should the President veto the bill and it
is sustained. A call from the President to Senator Long is recommended
whether he signs or vetoes. Incidentally, I understand Bob Novak thinks the
President can defend a veto politically.
Washington Post - 3/30/75
The Decision to Sign
L
By Lou Cannon
Washington Post Staff Writer
President Ford's decision to sign the $23.1 billion
tax cut bill despite severe misgivings reflects both his
Mr. Ford had been told by
congressionally acquired preference for compromise
Republican allies in the
and the belief of key advisers that he was unlikely to
House that he had a good
get a better bill from Congress.
chance of mustering the
"We had been dinging Congress for its failure to
votes to sustain a veto. The
act for the last several weeks," said one highly placed
Associated Press yesterday
White House official "We couldn't very well terms
quoted House Minerity
Washington Post - 4/2/75
Rowland Evans and Robert Novak
The Tax Bill: Alienating the Republican
Passing up what may be one of his
But others at the White House mcet-
Right
last, best chances to appease the Re-
publican right by vetoing the tax cut
ing learned more of the future by
bill, President Ford again rejected
watching the President's aides instead
advice from his staunchest congres-
of the President. Political counselor
sional supporters - and probably his
Robert T. Hartmann's expressively
own instincts — - to follow the urgings
glowering face did not hide displeas-
of White House aides.
ure over veto recommendations. "That
from going public is doubt that Rea-
The veto recommendation came not
told me a lot," one onlooker said. "I
gan, the logical challenger, will run.
fine
Signing the too bill is seen by such
num
By MacNelly for the Richmond News Leader
"Why, yes
As it matter of fact, I am a congressman
How could you tell?
11 as it my WIN button?"
FORD is LIBRARY 07V839
Washington Post - 4/3/75
Hobart Rowen
TheTax Bill: It Could Have Been Worse
There are so many positive and neg-
trend) hit the poorest groups the hard-
two breadwinners in a single family,
ative features to the new tax bill that
est, this is just the way the tax cut
where the expenses are larger than in-
it is hard to decide, on balance,
should be distributed. And virtually all
curred by one wage-earnen
whether it is a good law. This is en-
of the money will be spent, "trickling
Third, the housing credit. This is an
tirely apart from the obvious fact that
up" to all sorts of goods and services.
President Ford had no choice, except
This is a distinct victory for congres-
inexcusable giveaway, préviding a 5
to sign it, to get the anti-recession ben-
sional liberals, who will doubtless seize
per cent credit up to $2,000 for the
the opening wedge of the limited
purchase of a new house or mobile
efit of its overall economic stimulus.
"negative income tax" to try for per-
home, if under construction before
The best parts of the bill, the way
tax reformers see it, include those that
manent reforms when these provisions,
March 26. It may stimulate sales, but
most disturbed President Ford. These
most of them temporary, expire this
will cost the Treasury a minimum of
$600 million T liked Saw Klaman's
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Bany Galdwater U.S.S.
Paze
R.d.ng
The President
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
April 3, 1975
Dear Senator:
I am taking this opportunity to acknowledge
receipt of your March 31 letter to the President
and to assure you that it will be called to his
attention at the earliest opportunity.
With warm regards,
Sincerely,
William T. Kendall
Deputy Assistant
to the President
The Honorable Barry Goldwater
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
LIBRARY GERALD P. FORD
cc: w/incoming to Bob Wolthuis for further handling
WTK: VO:ve
1975 APR 3 AM 11 25
HAND DELIVERED
RECEP. AND SECURITY UNIT
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
BARRY GOLDWATER
COMMITTEES:
AERONAUTICAL AND SPACE SCIENCES
ARIZONA
ARMED SERVICES
PREPAREONESS INVESTIGATING SUBCOMMITTEE
Mnited States Senate
TACTICAL AIR POWER SUBCOMMITTEE
NATIONAL STOCKPILE AND NAVAL PETROLEUM
RESERVES SUBCOMMITTEE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
March 31, 1975
4.3
The President
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
When we first visited in your office after you had been
sworn in, I told you that from time to time I would be in
touch with you relative to positions you have taken which
I feel might be harmful to you or, more importantly, helpful.
N"
I am very vitally concerned and interested with your tenure
as our President, not just because we have been long, per-
sonal friends, or that you stuck by me in '64, when wisdom
probably said go elsewhere, but most importantly because
you are my President, and I want you to be the very best.
That is why from time to time I will continue to direct
remarks to you personally, and when I intend them to be
made in public I'll let you know. However, this is not one
of those cases.
I watched you on television the other evening as you ex-
plained your reasons for signing the Tax Reduction Bill
and, frankly, Mr. President, I was a bit disappointed. I
could understand completely and fully the position you took
that you might get a worse bill from this Congress if you
vetoed it, but even though I understood it, Mr. President,
I think what was needed at that particular point in our his-
tory was a demonstration of leadership, not compromise. You
could have taken a very strong stand against this measure be-
cause, believe me, I'm not speaking from just my own experi-
ence, I'm speaking from the experience of many people with
whom I have talked, the country is not sold on the need for
this tax reduction or, in fact, any at all.
The country really would like to know what a $50 billion
deficit repeated one, two or three years in a row will do
to us and, frankly, no one has told them. The other night
with your speech I thought maybe we are going to get it but
still the average American is in the dark as to what a defi-
cit will do to him. The average American, and this includes
the great majority of the members of Congress, have abso-
lutely no understanding of the operation of our economic
system, particularly the monetary side of it. I have
charged publicly that any deficit in the neighborhood of
$50 billion repeated for two years could bring national
bankruptcy within five years and I have yet to be refuted
by any economist either on the left or the right.
BERMED FORD LIBRARY
pl our OCONOBTEF effpez on pus 101F or FUD trays'
ETAP ASSES eug I USAG Asc CO pe required
220 PTTTTON Lebested TOS EMO AGUES COOTS prind
to boodrodupian sild at disitsb vns dedd Vistiduq begredo
FUE erge of TF' I usae
INCOTA NO OF FH9 obersprov of ONE OCODOWTC
sue dissp 15 OF FPG поирета OZ COUGLERS' реде spac-
OFF ATT (TO CO ITW* ape SAGLESS sug THIS
SETTI FUB GASINGS VEGLTCSN T2 IV FUG ggix 02 CO must 9 9617-
MICH lost sheecy T сропдир mgAps MG 916 дотий CO 40f IF prif
FO да DO oue per FOIG cpem* tue offer urang
question rebesred ous' 2MO or FURGS A6912 TU S IOM ATTI go
we cosupil LEGITÀ MONTH IIKS CO mpsf 9 220 PITYTOU
FNTS FSX regnestor OZ' TV and of "IT"
MISSO I реде FATHER' FUG compt) Tº vor 2019 ou EUG used IOI
alacon to and mover princess
comes' POTICAS ws' I." UDF abesprud FLOW 1086 NA DAU export-
CORITS руде pepou g ASIA actoud apang address FHIS pe-
Fort M98 0 of NOF дов
T FHTNK apre NOB useqeq up FREE borus TO 001 pre-
Accord TC' pap BASU provide I If' WE' brees goup'
FUST Non wrapp asp 9 MOI.86 PTTI FLOW ΓpTe Coudress
Non
conta TUG EATTA EVS DOBTRTON
contoggealb sid 5 asw I an
R
M notsoubed K&T odd palaple TOT enosser INCY benisity
I Ascepeq Лоп OU the ofper SACUTED 98 Aon SX-
FOOM OMAIL ROOM
WHITE HOUSE
06 ppone C9892'
wage ID EMPITO T.TT ISF Aom KUOM* HOMEAGE' sure TO
OUG
темятке CO Лод sug Apon I rucoug FROM FO
TPUF TO mux FLOW FTIMS FO FIRS I MII courtune CO griesp
Лоп 910 DA sug I agus Non CO per FPG AGEA peac*
PropeptA 2970 to prip word ресэлав
BOUST Extende or pusp Non REDOK ps 116 TM ser MUGU мтадош
93 O/II, NOF Inec pecentes AS роде peeu Joud! bar-
1 gm AGIA ATEPITA CONCERNED gug ATFP AONE
I wrapp pc permany CO Non
gonou STEP Дол CO Non реде caker MyTop
BMOLU TV" I FRIG for pust price FO FTWG I MONIC ps TM
need bed NOY motts soitto away at bettaly deals Out nerm
pour ME*
D' C 30200
DUG MYTER Hones
are broatgent
WELCP 3T' 7812
estate.
inc.
The President
Page Two
March 31, 1975
What you have done, in effect, is to possibly have given the
country a little respite but a little is going to be all and
respite may be a very calm word for it. When the federal
government has to start borrowing money from the private sec-
tor for the deficits that are coming up, interest rates are
going to mount again, building is going to stop again, jobs
are going to fall off again, and we will be right back where
we were about December or January of this current fiscal year.
Now I apologize to you for having lectured in an economic
way when all I wanted to tell you was at that particular
time, on that particular evening you could have won the back-
ing of the American people in such a way that they would have
looked upon you as a leader. Now I'm afraid, with all res-
pect to you and to your office, you are going to have to
wait until another time comes. Tax reduction at this time
is not going to work, it's only going to hurt.
Bany With respect,
Barry Goldwater
FORD is DERALD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Bob
as yer our
telecon -
NO
U/M
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 7, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JAMES J. CANNON, III
L. WILLIAM SEIDMAN
THRU:
JOHN O. MARSH
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF
VERN LOEN
FROM:
DOUGLAS P. BENNETT
SUBJECT:
Housing Tax Credit ($2, 000) Provision in the
Tax Reduction Act of 1975
Dr. Larry Woodworth, Chief of Staff of the Joint Tax Committee, Friday
advised me that both Chairmen Long and Ullman have been concerned that
the applicability of this provision may be retarded in a fashion contradictory
to the intent of the provision. Apparently, many new housing developments
and condominiums are priced in such a manner that the first few units are
sold as "loss leaders" so as to attract buyers and as sales pick up, the
prices of the housing units are increased so as to eventually reflect the
"true" sales prices.
Under the certification provision of the statute, the seller is required in the
face of civil and criminal penalties to certify that the particular unit is being
sold at the lowest price at which it has ever been offered. Obviously, the
above described practice would disqualify many of the housing units in the
current inventory thereby diminishing the sought-after effect of this provision.
Long and Ullman are considering issuing a joint statement suggesting that
this technical defect be corrected by minor amendment. The matter has
been discussed with the Treasury Department and, I understand, Secretary
Simon concurs with the amendatory approach as the defect cannot be re-
medied by Treasury regulations.
CC:
Secretary William E. Simon, Secretary Carla Hills, Honorable James
T. Lynn, Honorable James H. Cavanaugh, Honorable Tod Hullin
FORD LIBRARY
APR 7 1974
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 7, 1975
TO:
DOUG BENNETT
FROM:
GLENN Jasonce SCHLEEDE
SUBJECT: PETROLEUM TAX
PROVISIONS OF THE
TAX REDUCTION ACT
Is this analysis correct?
CC: Mike Duval
CONFIDENTIA
PRELIMINARY
MAJOR PETROLEUM TAX PROVISIONS
Determined to be an
OF THE TAX REDUCTION ACT
Administrative Marking
Domestic
By 80 NARA, Date 4/21/14
(1) Oil depletion lost entirely for integrated companies.
(2) Oil depletion cut sharply for non-integrated companies which are actively
drilling:
(a) Limited to 2000 B/D phased down to 1000 B/D by 1980.
(b) Rate phased down from 22% to 15%, 1981-1985.
(c) Limited to 65% of taxable income (after deducting dry hole
and development intangible expenses) - oil plus gas depletion
limited to 65%.
(d) Reduced at 6-to-1 ratio to the extent that gas depletion is taken.
Actively drilling companies lose depletion dollar-for-dollar once the
income limitation is reached. Royalty owners and companies not drilling
are not greatly affected by (c).
(3) Gas depletion cut sharply after mid-1976:
(a) Regulated gas exempt from cut until July 1, 1976, unless FPC
raises price.
(b) Fixed-price gas exempt.
(c) Integrated companies lose all other gas depletion.
(d) Non-integrated companies limited to 2000 B/D oil equivalent,
reduced at 6-to-1 ratio to the extent that oil depletion is
taken - oil plus gas limited to 2000 B/D oil equivalent.
Foreign
(1) Per country method repealed for taxable years after 1975.
(2) Overall method seriously impaired:
(a) Foreign-source income divided into "oil-related" and "other" with
no transfer of unused credits between categories. Chemicals in
"other;" primary feedstocks uncertain. Interest from foreign-
incorporated petroleum
011-Related
Other
affiliates is oil-related,
but not from U.S.-incorporated
Refining;
petroleum affiliates (drafting
Marketing;
Chemicals;
error?).
Pipe Lines.
Insurance;
Interest from
Tankers
U.S.-incorporated
oil affiliates
FORD is LIBRARY
Extractive
(Producing)
-2-
(b) Unused foreign tax credits from oil production can be transferred
to other oil-related, but limited to 4.8% of taxable income in
1975, 2.4% in 1976, 2.0% thereafter.
(c) Tanker income taxed currencly unless covered by other credits or
reinvested in foreign flag ships.
(d) Foreign losses (over-all) subject to recapture by U.S. Treasury
after 1975 - affects exploration losses and intangibles expensed.
(3) No foreign tax credit on purchases above or below market price where there
is no economic interest in property.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 8, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JAMES J. CANNON, III
THRU:
JOHN O. MARSH
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF
VERN LOEN VL
FROM:
DOUGLAS P. BENNETT
SUBJECT:
Tax Reform Bill
In discussion with Dr. Larry Woodworth last week, he described to me
the items expected to be included in the Tax Reform Bill which will hope-
fully be completed by the Ways and Means Committee by late summer or
early fall. Apparently, this reflects the thinking of Chairmen Ullman
and Long.
The starting point for consideration of this legislation will be the Ways
and Means' tax reform bill which was reported out of that Committee
late last year but never was acted on by the House. That bill was basically
structured by Chairman Wilbur Mills.
Larry expects about $5 B revenue will be raised by the following changes
in the law:
(1) Minimum Taxable Income (MTI) - The concept advanced by the
Treasury Department and included in last year's bill will be structurally
changed this year. The changes will probably be reflective of the opposition
from charitable organizations claiming that the Treasury approach would
substantially reduce charitable giving.
(2) Limitation on Artificial Accounting Losses (LAL) - This
proposal relates to the so-called tax shelters. The most "popular" of
which are oil shelters, real estate shelters and farm shelters.
(3) Repeal of DISC.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
- 2 -
(4) Repeal of Certain Foreign Taxation Provisions - - These will
probably include those provisions in last year's bill which were not dealt
with in the recently signed Tax Reduction Bill. (In addition, some pro-
visions further dealing with oil depletion will be included primarily for
political reasons).
The other provisions to be included will be the simplification
proposal of the Treasury Department which is basically an effort to simplify
tax return preparation by individuals accomplished by eliminating certain
complicated, difficult to compute, itemized deductions and substituting a
"simplification deduction".
Secondly, capital gains and losses will not be dealt with other
than by increasing the capital gains and losses holding period - - from six
months to twelve months and also a three-year elective loss carryback.
In place of the sliding scale proposal for capital gains there will be included
the concept of integration. Basically, this means that to some extent the
profits of corporations and dividends received by shareholders would be
taxed only once. 100% integration would cost approximately $9 B, there-
fore, they will probably only go 25% of the way toward integration. Pro-
visions relating to the banking and insurance industries may also be included.
Thirdly, estate and gift tax law will be dealt with in a separate
bill to follow the general tax reform bill.
I am certain that various other provisions will be added in committee but
apparently Ullman hopes to end up with a net revenue gain from this bill.
cc:
Secretary William E. Simon, James T. Lynn, Frederic W. Hickman,
Paul H. O'Neill, William Seidman, Alan Greenspan
bcc: Bill Kendall
Pat O'Donnell
Charlie Leppert
Bob Wolthuis
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
APR 12 1975
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 11, 1975
M
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF
THRU:
VERN LOEN
VC
FROM:
DOUGLAS P. BENNETT
DPB
SUBJECT:
John Rhodes
With respect to the final consideration of the House regarding
the Conference Report on the Tax Reduction Act of 1975, it
strikes me that John Rhodes, rightly or wrongly, ended up out
on a limb and way out front in his statements that evening and
the next day that the President would veto the bill. He realizes
that nobody ever said absolutely that the bill would be vetoed
but his interpretation was that there was a very, very strong
possibility that the bill would be vetoed. It seems to me that
it would be wise for the President to somehow pacify John by
thanking him for his efforts to get a better tax bill and perhaps
explaining personally the reasons why he signed it.
CCN
Jack Marsh
Charles Leppert
Bob Wolthuis
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD