Independent secondary corroboration of Slaughter’s account: the collection method embedded a production-scale preference in the tax.
Veach explains why a nominally uniform excise operated differently for monitored urban producers and seasonal rural distillers.
The capacity of their stills was gauged, full-time production was assumed, and a tax equivalent to four months’ production was assessed. Because farmers rarely distilled more than two months a year and sometimes as little as one week a year, they were being charged taxes for whiskey they would never produce.
12
12
Chapter 1 — Farmer Distillers and the Whiskey Rebellion
Visually verified against PDF page 25, printed page 12.
Evidence
The capacity of their stills was gauged, full-time production was assumed, and a tax equivalent to four months’ production was assessed. Because farmers rarely distilled more than two months a year and sometimes as little as one week a year, they were being charged taxes for whiskey they would never produce.
Locator
Locator type: Page
Start: 12
End: 12
Source section: Chapter 1 — Farmer Distillers and the Whiskey Rebellion
Context
Veach explains why a nominally uniform excise operated differently for monitored urban producers and seasonal rural distillers.
Annotation
Independent secondary corroboration of Slaughter’s account: the collection method embedded a production-scale preference in the tax.
Verification
Status: Verified
Visually verified against PDF page 25, printed page 12.