upr000065 237

V come of corporations from 22% to 25%, resulting in a combined tax rate, exclusive of excess profit taxes, of 52% instead of 47% which was applicable prior to the enactment of said law. In the evidence presented at the former hearings in this case and in the Commission’s Opinion and Order of August 24, 1951, the revenue reouirements of the ’later Company, after payment of Federal income taxes, were computed at the combined rate of 47% rather than at the combined rate of 52% which became effective as of .April 1, 1951. Accordingly the rates pre­scribed by the Commission in its orders of August 24, 1951, and December 7, 1951, do not make allowance for the increased income tax rates which became effective on April 1, 1951. If a rehearing is granted in the above entitled case, your peti­tioner will present evidence showing the effect of the tax in crease in the 1951 Revenue Act upon the revenue reouirements of the ¥ater Company, y In the event a rehearing is granted in the above en titled case, petitioner proposes to introduce additional evi­dence with respect to the amount of water hearing land and rie-hts of way to be included in the rate base of the Railroad Company, the propriety of fixing the rate base of the Rail­road Company and the ’Aster Company at not less than the o- riginal cost of the water production and water distribution facilities, the amounts of accrued depreciation which should be deducted from the cost or value of the properties of the 6.