As you know, the gasoline tax presently in New York State amounts to approximately 30 percent of the retail price. Isn't it about time that gasoline be considered a necessity and tax it as a necessity rather than a luxury? As one of your constituents, I urge you to vote against any further increase in gasoline taxes, and, in addition, to make this letter a matter of record at the hearings to be conducted by the Ways and Means Committee of the U.S. Congress. Cordially yours, R. N. HEISLER, Manager, Direct Marketing. LOUISVILLE AUTOMOBILE CLUB, INC., Representative JOHN C. Watts, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. WATTS: At a meeting of the executive committee of this club held yesterday, it was voted that our position be restated as being opposed to any increase in Federal gasoline tax. Further, that we support the AAA policy of favoring the issuance of short-term revenue bonds to meet the deficits in the highway trust fund for the fiscal years 1961 and 1962. The membership of the Louisville Automobile Club, as of this date, totals 54,206, and our board feels that its policy is in accord with the sentiment of the great majority of these members. It is not necessary to remind you that the gasoline tax as now imposed, Federal and State, represents about 48 percent of the cost of the commodity at the pump in Kentucky. There is danger that an additional tax on gasoline would reach the point of diminishing returns and further affect the economy of the entire State in the curtailment of necessary transportation. Our highway commissioner, Ward Oates, said recently in a public statement: "I think the 1%-cent tax per gallon or any tax on gasoline ought to be left to the States." In this connection, we must remind you of the fact that in the Commonwealth of Kentucky there are between 60,000 and 70,000 miles of public roads. The obligation rests largely upon the State authorities to improve and maintain the bulk of that mileage, and the source of revenue to the highway department does largely come from the present 7-cent State tax which is now excessive compared to a 6-cent State tax on the national average. In Kentucky an amendment to the constitution passed several years ago by a vote of the people does safeguard these funds for the purpose for which they are levied ; namely, the improvement of highways. We urge that you stand firmly against any increase in Federal gas tax levies. As a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, I would appreciate it if you would file this letter as a form of a brief with the committee. Very truly yours, EUGENE STUART, Secretary. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., July 15, 1959. Hon. WILBUR MILLS, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means, DEAR CHAIRMAN MILLS: I am taking the liberty of enclosing a telegram received from Mr. Clive R. Lane, manager of the Automobile Club of Kansas, voicing the opposition of 20,000 members of that organization to an increase in the Federal tax on gasoline. I would appreciate your making this communication a part of the hearing record. This correspondence is in further evidence of the feelings of the people of the State of Kansas in regard to the proposed increase. I also would like to go on record as being opposed to the proposed 11⁄2-cent increase in the Federal tax on gasoline. Your cooperation is appreciated, and with cordial wishes, I am, Sincerely yours, J. FLOYD BREEDING, Member of Congress. Representative J. FLOYD BREEDING, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.: TOPEKA, KANS., July 12, 1995. Twenty thousand Kansas AAA members are opposed to further increase in Federal gasoline tax, such taxes now adding 42 percent to retail price. The Automobile Club of Kansas believes it unfair for motorists to be saddled with additional tax burden. Our members support short-term revenue-bond finance plan. Senate Joint Resolution 109 of June 16, 1959, introduced by Senator Case, provides for type of interim short-term financing. We feel it represents most feasible method yet advanced to solve dilemma on an interim basis and keep highway program on schedule without at this time either adding to Federal deficit or raising highway users' tax burden. We respectfully urge this proposal be given your most careful consideration. Our members will appreciate your efforts in this important matter. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF KANSAS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: It would be greatly appreciated if you could have the attached copy of a telegram made a part of the printed record on the subject of financing the Highway Trust Fund. Thanking you and with kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours, IRIS BLITCH, Member of Congress. OCILLA, GA. Hon. IRIS BLITCH, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.: Please oppose any form of increase in the Federal tax on gasoline and diesel fuels. Also, work diligently for favorable action on H.R. 101, H.R. 3196, and H.R. 5116. Include this wire in the record of the hearings on this issue. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, Ways and Means Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. TANKERSLEY-SHIVER OIL CO., INC., HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., July 28, 1959. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Attached hereto you will find a letter I received from Mr. E. P. Godwin, Jr., Godwin Oil Co., Wilmington, N. C., concerning the proposed increase in the Federal gasoline tax. I would appreciate your placing Mr. Godwin's letter in the record of the committee hearings on this subject. Most sincerely, ALTON LENNON. GODWIN OIL CO., Wilmington, N.C., July 23, 1959. Hon. ALTON A. LENNON, DEAR ALTON: Hearings started July 22 on ways and means of financing the deficit in the Federal highway program. I feel that gasoline should not be taxed further to finance this program. In North Carolina we already have 10 cents per gallon tax on gasoline which represents approximately 40 percent of the wholesale cost. I would like for you to register my protest against further taxation of gasoline for any purpose. If it should become necessary to place a small increase on gasoline please include in the legislative act provisions that would provide the change of level of imposing the gasoline tax from the time of sale by the manufacturer to the time of sale by the wholesale distributor (I am a wholesale distributor) as provided in H.R. 101, the Harrison bill. This feature would provide a small measure of relief capitalwise for small business like myself in that we would be able to pay the tax to the Federal Government after we sell and collect for the gasoline rather than pay it direct to the manufacturer when we actually receive it and have our money tied up in the tax while it is in our storage and the manufacturer who is our supplier uses this money for himself before he has to turn it over to the Federal Government. Any further increase in gasoline taxes would require additional capital and place a further burden on small distributors like myself unless some relief was provided as asked for in H.R. 101. I would like for you to include this letter in the record of the hearings on the bill and also keep me informed of any new developments in regard to the bill. Sincerely yours, E. P. GODWIN, Jr. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Attached is a letter I have received from my constituent, Mr. R. M. Cartwright, of Pharr, Tex., protesting any increases in the Federal tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. It is respectfully requested that Mr. Cartwright's letter be considered in connection with the hearings on this legislation, and if possible, that it be made a part of the hearings. Thank you for any consideration you may give my request, and with kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely, JOE M. KILGORE. CARTWRIGHT OIL CO., Hon. JOE M. KILGORE, Congressman, 15th District, Capitol Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR JOE: I am writing you about the proposed increased amount of the Federal gasoline and diesel fuel tax. I understand that this hearing is to come up on July 22. I want you to know that I am against this increase, and so are the members of the Texas Oil Jobbers Association. I feel that there is too much of the present tax on gasoline being diverted at the present time. I am not in favor of an increase of a temporary nature. It seems that once it's on it's hard to get it removed. Should there be no other way but to increase the tax on fuel, then I would like to see the bill to change the level of paying the gasoline tax from the time of sale by the manufacturer to the time of sale by the wholesale distributor. This is bill H.R. 101 by Harrison, of Virginia. I would like for my letter to be included in the hearings on this issue and made a part of the record of such hearings. Best regards. Your friend, R. M. CARTWRIGHT, Owner. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, Ways and Means Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. John F. Martin, of John F. Martin & Sons, Mount Vernon, Wash., has requested me to submit the enclosed letter to you in order that it may be included in the record of hearings your committee holds on the Federal tax on gasoline and diesel fuels issue. Sincerely yours, JACK WESTLAND, Re Federal tax on gasoline and diesel fuels. JOHN F. MARTIN & SONS, Mount Vernon, Wash., July 21, 1959. New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR JACK: With a present tax on gasoline of 62 cents per gallon for the State and 3 cents for the Federal Government it seems inconceivable to raise it more. Our business is such that to increase the tax can only curtail sales. Our profit, as a distributor, is only 2.6 cents per gallon on regular and 3.1 cents per gallon premium. It does not seem fair nor just for the tax on this product to be so much more than the profit that we make. Under present laws we pay the above tax whether we collect for the sale or lose the product by leaks, spillage accident, or evaporation. If taxes are increased, the least that could possibly be done, would be to change the level of collecting the tax by providing in the bill the provisions called for in the Harrison bill, H.R. 101. Your consideration of our request to work against an increase in Federal tax and if unable to defeat, to work for a change in the level at which the tax is collected will be appreciated. We would also like to request that this letter be included in the record of the hearings of this issue. Yours very truly, JOHN F. MARTIN. WILSON GAS & OIL CO., INC., Hon. OLIN D. JOHNSTON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR: Please have this letter recorded in the record of the hearings beginning on July 22, 1959, before the House Ways and Means Committee concerning increase in Federal gasoline taxes, as a vigorous protest against said increase. The petroleum industry of which we are a very small part is already carrying its share of the tax burdens, and the interstate roadbuilding program was promoted as a pay-as-you-go project and I sincerely believe will do that very thing at the present rate of gasoline tax; without thrusting upon our shoulders additional taxes at this time. Please do whatever is possible to prevent any increase, and should there be a necessity for any tax increase please have an amendment added including the provisions of the Harrison bill (H.R. 101) which would change the level of imposing all gasoline taxes, from the time of sale by the manufacturer to the time of sale by the wholesale distributor. Thanking you for your interest in this very vital matter, I am, Yours very truly, E. CLYBURN WILSON. CONDON OIL CO., Ripon, Wis., July 17, 1959. Representative WILLIAM VAN PELT, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN VAN PELT: I wish to express to you my opposition to any attempt to increase the Federal taxes on gasoline during this session of the Congress. Seems to me it has been proven over and over again that the Federal highway program is an item of defense, and, therefore, should be paid for by all the people, instead of adding to an already overtaxed necessary item. If there is no way out-other than some compromise increase then you people on the Ways and Means Committee should certainly give us oil jobbers the same consideration the statutes now give to the major oil companies; namely to allow us to pay this tax to the Government in the same manner as they do. The Harrison bill (H.R. 101) and other similar bills would accomplish this purpose. I would like this letter to be included in the record of hearings on this issue. Sincerely, D. B. CONDON. U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, DEAR WILBUR: I am enclosing several letters recently received from my constituents expressing their opposition to any increase in the Federal tax on gasoline. You will note that they have requested that their letters be made part of your committee's records on this legislation. With all kind wishes, I am Sincerely yours, SAM J. ERVIN, Jr. E. J. POPE & SON, Mount Olive, N.C., July 17, 1959. Hon. SAM J. ERVIN, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR: The purpose of my communication is to let you know that I bitterly oppose any increase, regardless of any amount, of Federal taxes on gasoline, diesel fuel, and special motor fuels. The taxes now, both Federal and State, constitute over one third of the retail price in my marketing territory. However, if despite my objections, the Federal increase is inevitable, then I would strongly urge for the provisions of Harrison bill (H.R. 101) changing the level of imposing the gasoline tax from the time of sale by the manufacturer to, the time of sale by the wholesale distributor be included. I would like for this communication to be included in the record of the hearing: on this issue. Many thanks for your efforts, Sincerely yours, E. J. POPE, Jr. HOOKS & LAYNE OIL Co., Hon. SAM J. ERVIN, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: It is my understanding that hearings began today for the purpose of finding means to finance the Federal highway program. From all I have read on the subject recently, it appears that additional Federal taxes on gasoline are almost certain to be voted. I would like to register my strong opposition to any further increases in the Federal tax on motor fuels. In my opinion, there would be no deficit in the highway trust fund if Federal automotive taxes already being collected were not used to subsidize other functions of our Government. I believe the record will show that in the year ending June 30, 1958, a total of 42 percent of Federal automotive taxes collected went into the general fund of the Treasury instead of into the highway trust fund. If this diversion were eliminated, I believe it would be possible to reduce Federal gasoline taxes rather than being in the position of attempting to increase them further. I will appreciate your serious consideration of this matter in the hope that you will see fit to oppose any increase in these taxes. I would also like to request: that this letter be included in the record of the hearings on this issue. With kindest regards, I am Yours very truly, W. A. HOOKS.. |