893.5123/12: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China (Johnson)

226. Nanking’s 270, September 17, 7 p.m. to Department; Department’s 224, September 16, 6 p.m.; and your 453, September 18, 6 p.m.,83 in regard to the Chinese income tax law.

In the event you feel that Kung’s approach to Peck, as reported in Nanking’s telegram under reference, calls for a reply, you are authorized to instruct Peck to call informally on Kung (at a convenient time after the delivery to the Foreign Office of your note of September 22) and make an oral reply in the sense of paragraph 2 of the Department’s instruction above mentioned. Peck may add that our decision in regard to the tax was reached after careful and sympathetic consideration but that the Department would be prepared to give further consideration to the matter in the event that all other governments concerned should acquiesce in the imposition of an income tax on their respective nationals.

With regard to the last sentence in paragraph 1 of Nanking’s telegram, Peck should explain to Kung that American firms could not be expected to act as agencies of the Chinese Government in the collection of the tax from Chinese citizens.

Hull
  1. The Ambassador in China in his telegram No. 453, September 18, 6 p.m., reported that the Embassy was addressing a note to the Chinese Foreign Office in compliance with paragraph 3 of the Department’s No. 224, the note to be delivered September 22.