Functional socialism

TAXATION 79

officials; the functional groups must be called into consultation. This, in its turn, would rob the Budget of its silly and portentous secrecy, no harm accruing, as there would be nothing for the speculators to speculate upon.

In a functional Budget, it is a moral certainty that income tax would disappear. The tax must fall upon the economic groups and the amount of the tax, charged at the source, would enter into cost. Four years ago I wrote this:

“The question is why should not all taxation be included in working costs and so finally enter into a national total turnover? Drawing a bow at a venture (for I have no means of correctly estimating the total figures) I shall be near the mark in stating that the Budget of £800,000,000 would represent a decimal of I per cent of our national turnover.”

THE SOVIET BUDGET

On this assumption, I advocated the payment of the Budget on a turnover tax, thus practically Wiping out the bulk of personal taxation. I was heartily laughed at for my pains. But others were working on the same idea. Russia, to wit. In the Soviet Budget estimate for 1934 I find that the Turnover Tax is incomparably the largest source of income: in roubles 29,227,790,000. Consider that! Put theroubleat one shilling: nearly £1, 500,000,000! In addition to this Turnover Tax, there is a special Merchandise Fund of over £30,000,000, whilst other socialized industries yield £76,000,000. The