AS a guide to President L. O. Ripley in determining the procedure of the Kansas Chamber of Commerce with respect to the proposed federal tax program, a survey of the opinions of the directors was conducted in July and August.

     An unbiased statement of the situation was prepared by the research department of the State Chamber from material available and the directors were queried as to their views on the proposed new rates on inheritances, individual incomes and net corporate incomes and, also, whether they favored action by the recently adjourned Congress or at a later date.

     There was a 100% response -- each one of the 44 directors recording his views. Tabulation of the voting on the questions showed a varying majority opposed to the proposed program. More decisive was the 2 to 1 majority registered against immediate action on the proposals by Congress and favoring delay to permit time for further study of the problem.

     Even more enlightening were the comments made by the individual directors in sending in their reports. An analysis of these comments appears to justify the following conclusions as representing the opinion of the great majority of the directors:

     1. There is practically unanimity in acceptance of the fact that the state of the federal budget makes new and higher taxes imperative.
     2. There was a strong undercurrent of opposition to any new taxes or any increase in present ones until federal expenditures are curtailed. A number of those who voted in favor of the national administration's program did so with the reservation that the operating cost of the federal government be drastically reduced. There is a formidable resistance among board members to the levying of new taxes to simply produce additional revenue for spending purposes.
     3. The desirability and necessity of balancing the federal budget is generally expressed.
     4. There was emphatic sentiment against hurried congressional action and the opinion was dominant that nothing should be done prior to the next session of Congress.

     One director, who voted in favor of the administration's proposals, commented in this fashion: "I would have preferred one more question, namely: Do you favor a drastic reduction of governmental expenses? And I would have answered with a resounding affirmative. This question should have been put as No. 1, and is an absolute necessity if the government ever expects to balance the budget."

     Another points out that you cannot "soak the rich" without the masses "eventually footing the bill" and that curtailment of governmental expenses is an essential.

     Still another who was favorable to most of the administration program wrote: "My personal opinion is that we are riding for a fall or very greatly increased taxation for the great middle class of our people, and, hence, an increased burden on business and lack of public confidence in the future until the federal budget is balanced. I believe it will require both decreased expenditures and increased revenue to bring this about. In other words, I would be willing to stand higher taxes all along if I could see that we were getting somewhere by the program, but I would not be in favor of higher taxes without a well defined and assured program of federal budget balancing."

     In similar vein one director says: "My own judgment is that there should be a very substantial increase in taxation for the purpose of balancing the federal budget, but not on the present level of federal expenditures. The interests of business, as I see them, require that the so-called emergency expenditures of the federal government should be eliminated or greatly curtailed, and the taxation measures should then be framed to provide the necessary expense of the federal government. The rates should be high enough to take care of these expenses, even though the burden would be great upon business. There is no possibility that I can see of balancing the budget with expenditures continuing on the present basis."

     One other director succinctly comments: "The only way out of this mess is to cut expenses and hike taxes on all."

     An analysis of the views of the directors, along with a tabulation of their votes, was sent to each of the Kansas congressional delegation.