editoradmin
My Wife, The Printer
As a number of you know, my better half had never gotten very involved in printing or any other aspect of amateur journalism. Elaine needs to be given credit for putting up with my own hobby-horsing, and has done quite a bit of Echo proofreading over the years, but had managed to avoid the typecases.
This has changed. She not only now flings quite a bit of type, but has her own type stand in the spare room upstairs. In fact, she’s taken over about half of that spare room with assorted printing supplies and equipment, all in connection with a hot stamp imprinting “business” in which she has been engaged for two or three years now.
It all started with a neighbor who frequents flea markets in the Houston area. The neighbor picked up a Kingsley hot stamp machine and equipment on one of her excursions, thinking it was a printing antique of some sort. Knowing of my hobby shop, she showed it to Elaine, and offered to trade it for four old type cases. (“No rush – just take all this and give me the type cases any time.”) Somehow the Kingsley machine triggered a spark of interest in Elaine, and she agreed to the trade.
The Kingsley was in good condition, and quite a bit of type was included. After a brief experimental period and chats with a couple of local gift shops, she was soon doing the imprinting for paper items sold by the shops. Zillions of paper napkins, playing cards, match books, and small stationery packets were run through the Kingsley. The Kingsley type holders were somewhat limited in capacity, though, and generally required special grooved type, so she has since bought a new machine. It’s a Howard, which can use any metal type, and can handle a printing area of up to 2½ x 3¾ inches.
The number of specialty items in which she’s been involved and the prices people are willing to pay are rather remarkable. For example, Elaine made a simple line drawing of a member of the “Spartainaires” – the girl’s precision drill team of our local high school – and had a small cut of the drawing made by East Texas Engraving. She then printed the illustration on the lower left-hand corner of some nice sheets of writing paper; the paper was heavy enough so that, when folded, it could be mailed without an envelope. Packets of 10 sheets have sold like hot cakes at the local gift shop – at two bucks a packet.
Party invitations and napkins have been personalized in all sorts of interesting ways. “Fifty is Nifty” was imprinted on some napkins for a birthday party. “Bastard of the Year” was added to some 200 match book covers – something to do with a surprise party of a wife for her husband. We often wondered whether the husband had as much of a sense of humor as the little woman anticipated.
A few comments on the hot stamp imprinting process may be of interest to some.
The machine does not use ink, but instead prints when the type presses into a roll of foil paper against the item to be printed. The machine has a heating device, so that the pressure of the heated type (which reaches a temperature of 250 degrees or so) causes the foil to be fused into the item being printed. A downward pull on the handle causes the chase to move downward against the foil and napkin or whatever.
The foil can be obtained in a variety of colors; the machine can be adjusted so that an appropriate segment of the roll is pulled through with each impression. As indicated small cuts can be printed, also; they need to be solid metal, however, and not mounted on wood, so that the heat can be distributed properly to the printed surface.
Elaine has probably spent more on type and equipment than I’ve spent for my entire shop, but has recovered her investment several times over. So far, her interest continues to be unflagging, despite a pretty heavy workload at such times as Christmas and graduation. She’s even survived the trauma of seeing the effect of a full year’s business on our income tax return, including a self-employment Social Security tax. After surviving that, she’s likely to continue her little business for quite awhile – at least until the next Form 1040 is put together.
A dead fish and…
Very few of you will ever see my office, located at One Shell Plaza in downtown Houston. A brief description of its contents may be of some interest.
I’m still involved in income tax work for Shell Oil Company. You’re not interested in a description of such things as stacks of files or even the typography of my Prentice-Hall volume of the Infernal Revenue Code, so let’s move on to somewhat better things.
Behind my desk is a large original oil painting of a sailing ship, plunging ahead through a stormy sea. It’s all painted in various shades of brown and tan, with a grainy or sandy texture. Elaine purchased it for a song a few years ago at a nearby shopping mall, which had invited a number of local artists to exhibit their wares. She then framed it, resulting in a piece which I think is attractive and not just another office picture.
A six-pound mounted fish adorns one wall. The small plaque under it reads: “Hybrid Striped Bass, Lake Sommerville, 2-24-81.” We heard the fish were biting at this nearby lake during a warm spell early this past year, so I took a mid-week vacation day and, with Elaine, headed out for a little R & R. For once, the fishing report was correct and we landed several nice fish, including the six-pounder. It’s still the biggest fish I’ve ever caught.
Four large prints of antique autos are grouped on the far wall. An old friend of mine from Marine Corps days sent them to me, and Elaine again took care of the framing. He knew of my hobby printing and sent them to me because of a rather unique process used by his company, Reynolds Aluminum, in printing them. They look as if some aluminum powder has been baked on to make the chrome parts of the autos look like the real thing. Certain parts of the print are embossed into the paper, also, which helps to give a 3-dimensional effect. These pictures attract more attention from visitors than anything else in the office.
Then there’s a rather unimposing little framed item which few people notice unless I call their attention to it. It involves some rather crude yellowish letters and markings in a circular arrangement on black paper, in a simple frame. Upon careful inspection, the following words can be made out: “T. Crapper and Co., Sanitary Engineers, Marlboro Works, Chelsea, London.”
It’s an original brass rubbing of the central portion of an old manhole cover, made by Elaine at Westminster Abbey in London, when we were there in the fall of 1980. She was a bit self-conscious about being on her hands and knees making such a rubbing, but says there was at least one other lady there doing the same thing.
An article in Time a few years ago indicated that the engineer from Chelsea was knighted for his efforts in inventing the flush toilet. As some of you may have noted, Johnny Carson delights in calling attention to Sir Thomas Crapper on his “Tonight” show, and the continuing contribution of that gentleman to mankind.
A dead fish, some old cars, and a reminder of the semi-automatic commode. It all makes my office more livable, and a good contrast with modern tax problems.
A Visit With Wesson
Early in 1977, I believe it was, Fred Liddle had mentioned in a letter that the Wessons were moving to Washington, D.C. I happened to have a couple of spare hours while there on a business trip in early March, and managed to reach Wes on the telephone at his office.
It so happened that this was the time when three groups of citizens (some 90 people in total) were being held hostage at three points around the city by some armed dissidents trying to make a point which now escapes me. One person had been killed and several others wounded.
I managed to reach Wes on the phone, and he suggested that I drop by for a drink. He indicated his office was in part of the city blockaded by police, but that there should be no problems. “You can get into the area by using the 14th Street corridor. Then, tell the policeman at the final barricade that you have business in the National Press Building, and he’ll let you through.”
I had no idea where the National Press Building was, so hailed a cab. The cab driver knew where the building was located, and then was sorry he had admitted having such knowledge. He really wasn’t very keen on driving into that part of town.
He finally took the 14th Street route, when I insisted, although he obviously preferred a somewhat circuitous route which would have required my walking two or three extra blocks.
The cabbie dropped me off a half block or so from the barricade; he would go no further.
It soon became obvious that the National Press Building was directly across the street from the City Building, where a number of people were still being held hostage – and where the one killing and most of the other violence had occurred.
I walked unchallenged past the policewoman at the barricade as if I knew where I was going, and continued (rather briskly, I might add) the half block to the entrance of Wes’s office building – occasionally glancing at the ominous building across the street. It was a relief to duck into the National Press Building.
I now have to admit that no problems developed. There were never any signs of activity in the barricaded building across the street, and I spent an enjoyable 45 minutes or so with Wes in the club on the top floor of his building. For some reason there was no cab in sight when I left the building, so I decided to walk the few blocks back to my hotel.
Fannie v. Commissioner
Once in a while the flood of tax cases coming through our library at the office includes one of more than passing interest. One concerned the efforts of a full time legal secretary and part time poet to deduct the expenses of publishing a book of her poetry.
Fannie Hawkins, or perhaps her husband, obviously felt quite strongly about a tax deduction for the publishing expenses. She and her husband claimed a $3,096 deduction on their 1975 federal income tax return for the cost of publishing a 56-page book of poetry, Within the Heart of a Woman. The IRS disallowed the deduction. Fannie took the matter to the Tax Court, which agreed with the IRS. That was in 1979. Undaunted, she took the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Now, in 1981, she has lost again, as the Ninth Circuit has also announced its agreement with the IRS.
The following excerpt from the Tax Court Memorandum decision should be of interest to anyone at all interested in the details of the vanity press publishing:
“During 1975, Fannie, who was employed as a legal secretary, wrote a book of poetry entitled …Within the Heart of a Woman. In 1975, Fannie entered into an agreement for the publication of her book with Vantage Press, Inc… The agreement provided that –
(1) Fannie was to pay Vantage $3,000 to publish the book ($1,000 to be paid with the signing of the agreement; $1,000 to be paid upon receipt of the galley proofs; and $1,000 to be paid when the book was ready for delivery);
(2) the retail price of the book was to be $4.95 per copy, with $1.95 per copy going to Fannie as author, for the first 4,000 copies sold.
(3) Vantage was to do a certain amount of publicity and promotion but generally was to have the right to determine the extent, scope, and character of sales promotion, distribution, advertising, and publicity; and
(4) both Fannie and Vantage were to have the right to terminate the contract after two years and, upon termination, all rights in the book were to revert to Fannie.
Fannie’s book was published by Vantage in 1976. The book is 56 pages long and includes 43 poems. Sales of the book began around July or August of 1976. Approximately 350-400 copies of the book were sold during 1976.
Before 1975, Fannie was not in the business of writing. Before 1976, she did not receive any earnings from the sale of any books, short stories, poems or other literary efforts… Within the Heart of a Woman was Fannie’s first published literary work. She never had any of her works published in literary magazines. However, on rare occasions her writings occurred in community-type magazines. Fannie did not generally publish poems in magazines as she wished to control the exposure of her works.
On their 1975 return, petitioners deducted $3,096 as book publishing expenses. The expenses included amounts for legal services, home office expense, and some of the installment payments to Vantage.”
In considering the technical tax issues, neither court could agree with Fanny that her printing and publishing activity constituted a trade or business. She was unable to convince the judges that she was involved in such activities with the expectation of making a profit. Instead, “… Within the Heart of a Woman could just as easily be an isolated venture for the personal satisfaction of… [seeing her] poetry in print.”
The facts are not entirely clear, but I assume the IRS is letting her claim her publishing expenses to the extent they exceed proceeds from the sale of her books. It is clear, however, that they don’t want her to reduce taxes otherwise payable on her salary as a legal secretary by applying a net publishing loss. (It is also clear, although not discussed in the case, that they would expect tax to be paid if the book sold well, and the publishing profit resulted. The tax law is two-faced that way. You’re on your own if you have a hobby loss, but Uncle Sam is a willing partner whenever you have any profits.)
I hope that Fannie had a lot of fun writing and publishing her book. She hasn’t had much fun with the IRS and the two courts. Those efforts to obtain a tax deduction no doubt cost more in legal fees than the amount of tax at stake.
Obviously, a matter of principle is involved. In her heart, she knows she’s right…
A footnote to Fannie v. Commr.: One of the problems taxpayers face with court cases is that their personal financial and tax matters become open to public scrutiny. Thousands of copies of such cases are published, to offer guidance to other taxpayers faced with similar technical problems. So far as I know, Fannie is not a member of the AAPA or any other ajay group.
Render Unto Caesar…
Question: Out of 100 taxpayers with annual income of at least $500,000, how many do you think pay no federal income tax at all? 100? 80? 50?
Such a question was asked of a broad cross-section of taxpayers in 1978. The median guess was that 55 out of 100 of such high income people pay no income tax whatsoever.
The rich have all those tax shelters and loopholes, and are able to hire smart tax attorneys, so that most of them pay no tax at all. Right?
Wrong!
The official analysis of 1978 returns has now been released by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. There were 8,622 returns filed with income of half-a-million dollars or more. Of those, only ten resulted in no tax liability. That’s far less than 1 per 100.
The study shows there were a lot of returns with no income tax liability – 21,083,246, in fact, out of 89,771,551 total returns filed. Most were from the lower income groups – almost 20 million no-tax returns from the under-$10,000 income group.
Another common feeling is that the rich don’t pay as large a portion of their income to Uncle Sam as do lower and middle income taxpayers. A common plaint of taxpayers: “If only the IRS would tax the rich [loosely defined as anyone with higher income that the complainer] as they should, then my own taxes could be substantially reduced.” But look at this:
Income $500,000 & over: 0% of total returns; 0.6% of total income; 2.1% of total tax paid
Income $50,000 & over: 2.0% of total returns; 12.1% of total income; 25.6% of total tax paid
Income $20,000 & over: 24.8% of total returns; 56.2% of total income; 73.4% of total tax paid
Under $10,000: 75.2% of total returns; 43.8% of total income; 26.6% of total tax paid
Those 1978 Treasury statistics suggest that the affluent are paying a disproportionately high portion of the tax burden, in contrast with popular feeling to the contrary. For example, the $50,000-and-over category made up only 2% of the taxpayers, but paid over 25% of the total tax burden.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not making a pitch that the rich are over-taxed, but am just trying to keep the record straight. Most of the rich are paying tax – and quite a bit of tax. Even if all the $500,000-and-over people were taxed at a 100 per cent rate, with all their income confiscated, the effect on total revenues would be about as noticeable as a pimple on an elephant – and certainly not enough to permit a reduction in tax for the rest of us.
A few years ago, there was a spate of newspaper articles about 13 (as I recall) millionaires who paid no tax one year. The details underlying such nil liabilities were released by the IRS, but not generally reported by the press – although all the returns had been carefully audited and reflected, in my view, application of principles of the tax law which were (and are) generally fair and reasonable.
Question: Do such articles help the average taxpayer reach a balanced judgment about the burden on the more affluent taxpayers? If not, don’t such articles undermine our income tax structure by fostering false impressions concerning its degree of fairness?
Salmagundi
RUMINATIONS OF A DEADHEAD. Can it really have been three years since the last Echo appeared? It gave me a bit of a start to discover from my file that there have been no issues since August, 1978.
If the AAPA had an activity requirement, I would have been expelled long ago!
Six pages of type have been set for months, if not years. I had been thinking of a large issue, but the time has come to button this up and get out something. So let’s see what we can do.
OUR TWO YOUNGSTERS are not so little any more, and we have no more cute sayings to report. Brian is a junior at Texas A&M, currently majoring in journalism. Craig is a junior in high school, and is active in the Boy Scouts (as was Brian, when he was younger). Both tower over their parents, and enjoy it. Brian is 6’2” or so, while Craig is 5’11” and still growing.
Another aspect of their maturing process is that they’re now drivers. This means a number of things. Our driveway is more crowded, with the extra cars. We no longer have to take them on school errands, to the Scouts, to the movies, or to music lessons (but worry more). And our car insurance rates have gone out of sight.
FELLOW HOUSTONIAN Gordon Rouze made the papers a few months ago. The business section of The Houston Post included his picture, and announced that he had been made a vice president of his employing company, National Steel Products. I never think of Gordon without recalling that it was he who recruited me into the AAPA, way back in 1943.
SHELDON WESSON was in Houston on business this past October, and managed to break loose long enough to spend an evening at our home. It’s always good to have someone come by and browse through our printshop and hobby paraphernalia with us – particularly an old friend like Wes.
THE MARGINS of these pages continue to be flush to the right, although we’ve followed the little arguments in the bundles about unjustified lines with interest. We now have a number of ragged rights in the bundles. Anyone want to try the lunatic left?
A MAY VACATION TRIP to Hawaii is only a week away as I set this last page. A somewhat disconcerting item in this morning’s Post concerns a giant clam which died in the Waikiki Aquarium, after its weight had dropped from 350 to 295 pounds. The reason: the weather has been rainy and cloudy since last November. So why are we heading for Hawaii when there’s not even enough sun there to keep the clams alive?
THE AAPA BUNDLES continue to thrive despite the absence of laggards such as yours truly.
People Watcher is now working on its second hundred issues – 114 consecutive monthly issues as we go to press. A remarkable achievement. We did not get a piece in the bundle last summer recognizing that 100th issue, but want to go on record now as being among the fans of Gehry Geringer’s fine publication.
The Echo is the hobby publication of Les Boyer, Houston, Texas 77079. Types used in this issue are Murray Hill, Eurostyle Bold Extended, and Kennerley. Paper is varied: Kelsey’s India Tint for half the copies and a local “bargain” purchase of smooth Matte for the balance. The Matte is not carefully cut, and the varying sheet sizes make it impossible to have consistent margins and register. Cover stock is mostly Kelsey’s Leatherfinish. Run off on the old 8×12 Damon & Peets, motorized. May, ‘82.