Payne–Aldrich Tariff Act

The Payne–Aldrich Tariff Act of 1909 (ch. 6, 36 Stat. 11), sometimes referred to as the Tariff of 1909, is a United States federal law that amended the United States tariff schedules to raise certain tariffs on goods entering the United States.<ref name="nytimes2">Template:Cite news</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> It is named for U.S. representative Sereno E. Payne of New York and U.S. senator Nelson W. Aldrich of Rhode Island.

The Payne–Aldrich tariff began as a measure to enact the "tariff modification" plank of the Republican Party platform, which appealed to exporters, particularly Midwestern farmers and agriculture interests, and was understood by most contemporaries to mean a reduction in most rates. Although the final bill included provisions for a commission to study rates and free trade with the Philippines, it increased rates on most goods, angering progressives, who argued that high protective rates promoted monopoly, and led to a deep split in the Republican Party which culminated in the 1912 presidential primaries. The legislative debate over the bill also led directly to the adoption of a federal income tax via the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Background

From the inception of the Republican Party in the 1850s and particularly after the 1880s, Republican candidates and supporters had embraced the American system of political economy and Hamiltonian vision of a protective tariff for the promotion of industrial development. Under this system, high tariff rates were intended to promote higher sales of domestic goods and higher wages for industrial workers; critics argued that the system taxed consumers.<ref name=":0">Template:Cite web</ref> In 1896, William McKinley was elected president on a platform proposing tariff increases and his own record as an advocate for protective tariffs. The Dingley Act of 1897 placed average rates on imports at 47% and remained in effect until 1909.

By 1908, however, protective tariffs had begun to fall out of public favor. The growing consolidation and monopolization of heavy industry, in particular the political power of U.S. Steel and Standard Oil Company, had led to public criticism and rejection of the system of high protective tariff rates. In addition to traditional Democratic opposition, progressive insurgents within the Republican Party, primarily from the Midwest, criticized protective tariffs for promoting monopoly.<ref>Howard R. Smith, and John Fraser Hart, "The American tariff map." Geographical Review 45.3 (1955): 327–346 online Template:Webarchive.</ref> As a result, the platform adopted at the 1908 Republican National Convention called for revision of rates until they "equal the difference between the cost of production at home and abroad, with a reasonable profit to American industry."<ref name=":1">Template:Cite news</ref> This plank, according to The New York Times, was taken as a "freed-trade plank as to very large portions of our actual and possible foreign commerce."<ref name=":1" /> Republican nominee William Howard Taft won the 1908 election, and in a December interview with the Times, emphasized his view that although the language of the plank was "not entirely clear," he interpreted it to mean that "the measure of the tariff should be the difference between the cost of production of the article in this country and such cost abroad," with such estimated costs including consideration of "a reasonable manufacturer's profit."<ref>Template:Cite news</ref>

Legislative history

On November 10, 1908, two days after Taft's election, the United States House Committee on Ways and Means opened public hearings on tariff revision which lasted until the holiday recess on December 24.<ref name=":0" /> During his inaugural address, Taft declared that he would veto any tariff bill that did not lower rates and called for a two percent tax on corporate profits to supplement government revenues.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":2">Template:Cite web</ref> It appeared to much of the country that he had endorsed the traditional Democratic Party position of a tariff for the purpose of government revenue only (and not for industrial protection).<ref name=":0" />

In keeping with his political promises, Taft called a special session of the 61st United States Congress on March 15, 1909, soon after his inauguration, to address the subject of tariff reform.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":2" /> However, he heeded the advice of Ways and Means chair Sereno E. Payne, Speaker of the House Joe Cannon, and senator Nelson W. Aldrich, who would lead the debate in the Senate, to refrain from interference until the bill reached a conference. Their advice was consistent with Taft's belief that the president should not take an active role in the legislative process.<ref name=":0" /><ref>Frank W. Taussig, The Tariff History of the United States (8th ed. 1931), pp. 361–408. online</ref>

Because tariff legislation is a form of tax policy, all tariff bills originated in the United States House of Representatives, with Payne's committee. On March 17, 1909, Payne introduced an initial draft bill that called for reductions, although he was a protectionist.Template:Which However, during the House debate over the bill, several representatives introduced revisions to increase rates on products manufactured in their districts with support from Speaker Cannon. Despite these revisions, Taft reacted favorably when the House bill passed 217Template:En dash61 and refused to threaten a veto or to withhold federal patronage from the opponents of reform.<ref name=":0" />

In the Senate, the bill was revised under the leadership of Nelson W. Aldrich, an ardent protectionist and veteran of numerous congressional tariff debates over the prior decades. Aldrich consulted with lobbyists for American industries throughout the spring and summer of 1909. Without offering a public explanation, Aldrich made nearly 900 revisions to the House bill, including increases in 600 rates, and sought to prevent review of the document by reformers.<ref name=":0" /> The Senate bill passed in early July, 45Template:En dash34. Reformers objected to the rate increases as well as the strong-arm legislative tactics employed by Aldrich.<ref name=":0" />

To reconcile the two versions of the bill, the House and Senate appointed a select conference committee. Speaker Cannon and Aldrich stacked the committee with a majority of protectionists. During the conference debate, Aldrich did concede to include a corporation tax but rejected all amendments lowering rates further.<ref name=":0" /> The bill narrowly passed the House on July 30, 195Template:En dash183, with twenty Republicans crossing party lines to join a solid Democratic bloc against the bill. The bill passed the Senate on August 5, 47Template:En dash31, with ten Republicans dissenting.<ref name=":0" />

President Taft signed the bill into law at 5:05 pm on August 5, 1909.<ref>36 Stat. 11 (Pub. Law 61-5). https://govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/36/STATUTE-36-Pg11b.pdf Template:Webarchive</ref>

Contents

One provision of the law provided for the creation of a tariff board to study the problem of tariff modification in full and to collect information on the subject for the use of Congress and the President in future tariff considerations. Another provision allowed for free trade with the Philippines, then under American control. Congress passed the bill officially on April 9, 1909.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> The bill states it would "take effect the day following its passage."<ref>Sec. 42, 36 Stat. 11 (Pub. Law 61-5). https://govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/36/STATUTE-36-Pg11b.pdf Template:Webarchive</ref>

Reaction and impact

Political reaction

Taft hoped that the act would stimulate the economic and enhance his political standing. He praised the provision empowering the president to raise rates on countries which discriminated against American products and the provision for free trade with the Philippines.<ref name=":3">Stanley D. Solvick, "William Howard Taft and the Payne–Aldrich Tariff." Mississippi Valley Historical Review 50.3 (1963): 424–442 online Template:Webarchive.</ref> Taft embarked on a speaking tour in September 1909, speaking across the country in support of the PayneTemplate:En dashAldrich Act, visiting Boston, Chicago, Milwaukee, and other cities. At Winona, Minnesota, Taft said it was "the best tariff bill the Republican Party ever passed."<ref name=":0" />

It immediately frustrated proponents of tariffs reform.<ref>Paolo E. Coletta, The Presidency of William Howard Taft (1973) pp 45–76.</ref> In particular, the increased duty on print paper led the publishing industry to viciously criticize Taft, further tarnishing his image, and the Congress. Some critics charged that Taft should have more actively pressed Congress for reductions.<ref name=":3" /> The reaction further divided the progressive, insurgent faction of the Republican Party from its "Old Guard."<ref>Lewis L. Gould, "Western Range Senators and the Payne–Aldrich Tariff." Pacific Northwest Quarterly 64.2 (1973): 49–56 online Template:Webarchive</ref> This split led to the party's losses in the 1910 elections and a challenge against Taft by his predecessor, Theodore Roosevelt, in the 1912 presidential primaries. After Taft won the nomination at the 1912 Republican National Convention, Roosevelt contested the general election on an independent ticket and split the Republican vote, resulting in the election of Woodrow Wilson, the Democratic nominee.<ref>Claude E. Barfield, "'Our Share of the Booty': The Democratic Party Cannonism, and the Payne–Aldrich Tariff." Journal of American History 57.2 (1970): 308–323 online Template:Webarchive.</ref> During the next Congress, Wilson signed the Revenue Act of 1913, lowering tariff rates across the board and introducing the first federal income tax. Thereafter, the United States government relied on income taxes for an increasing proportion of revenues.

Academic reactions

In an article for the Quarterly Journal of Economics, F. W. Taussig wrote that the congressional debates about the tariffs were "depressing for the economist. There is hardly a gleam of general reasoning of the sort which is applied in our books to questions of international trade... That there should be general acceptance of the protectionist principle, and that the only question in debate should be whether duties were "unreasonably" high, was natural enough. Most people get used to existing conditions, and cannot easily conceive of anything different."<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

Legal challenges

The corporate tax provision was challenged and affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.<ref>John D. Buenker, The Income Tax and the Progressive Era (Routledge, 2018).</ref>

Further reading

• Aldrich, Mark. "Tariffs and Trusts, Profiteers and Middlemen: Popular Explanations for the High Cost of Living, 1897–1920." History of Political Economy 45.4 (2013): 693–746.
• Barfield, Claude E. "'Our Share of the Booty': The Democratic Party Cannonism, and the Payne–Aldrich Tariff." Journal of American History (1970) 57#2 pp. 308–323. in JSTOR
• Brawley, Mark R. " 'And we would have the field': US Steel and American trade policy, 1908–1912." Business and Politics 19.3 (2017): 424–453.
• Coletta, Paolo Enrico. The Presidency of William Howard Taft (University Press of Kansas, 1973) pp 61–71.
• Detzer, David W. "Businessmen, Reformers and Tariff Revision: The Payne–Aldrich Tariff of 1909." Historian (1973) 35#2 pp. 196–204.
• Fisk, George. "The Payne–Aldrich Tariff," Political Science Quarterly (1910) 25#1 pp. 35–68; in JSTOR
• Gould, Lewis L. "Western Range Senators and the Payne–Aldrich Tariff." Pacific Northwest Quarterly (1973): 49–56. in JSTOR
• Gould, Lewis L. "New Perspectives on the Republican Party, 1877–1913," American Historical Review (1972) 77#4 pp. 1074–1082 in JSTOR
• Gould, Lewis L. The William Howard Taft Presidency (University Press of Kansas, 2009) 51–64.

• Little, Geoffrey Robert. "" Print paper ought to be as free as the air and water": American Newspapers, Canadian Newsprint, and the Payne-Aldrich Tariff, 1909–1913." American Periodicals: A Journal of History & Criticism 32.1 (2022): 53-69. excerpt
• Mowry, George E. Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Movement (1946) pp. 36–65 online.
• Mowry, George E. The Era of Theodore Roosevelt, 1900–1912 (1958) pp. 242–247 read online
• Solvick, Stanley D. "William Howard Taft and the Payne–Aldrich Tariff." Mississippi Valley Historical Review (1963) pp. 424–442 in JSTOR.
• Taussig, Frank W. The Tariff History of the United States (8th ed. 1931), pp. 361–408 online
• Wolman, Paul. Most Favored Nation: The Republican Revisionists and US Tariff Policy, 1897–1912 (U of North Carolina Press, 2000).