William Bryan: “Mr. President, this is the wrong place and the wrong time to be considering an amendment of this nature. This would make…”

“Mr. President, this is the wrong place and the wrong time to be considering an amendment of this nature. This would make a fundamental change in the tax law with respect to the percentage depletion for the recovery of mineral deposits, a provision that has been in the Tax Code for more than six decades. It would discriminate against only one type of mining activity--that which occurs on the public lands. The proponents of this amendment really are debating today changes they want to seek in the mining law of 1872. I do not disagree that changes need to be made. We are prepared, in representing a State in which this is such an important industry, to provide for royalty provisions, fair market value of the surface, as well as reclamation efforts. The ore body itself is a wasting asset. So a depletion allowance for mineral recovery is analogous to depreciation permitted on the improvements on real property. So this is not some exotic provision in the Tax Code. It recognizes that the ore body itself will be exhausted in a finite period of time, and it seeks to provide that kind of tax coverage. Finally, I want to point out, as my colleague from Utah pointed out, that this would be an administrative nightmare.”