Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-03-07
A False Measure Of Tax Burden.


All these figures show the absolute
worthlessness Of the census reports Of re-
lation of assessment to true values, and
prevent estimates of actual tax burden
| based on the application of these re-
ports to the tax-rate from having any
value whatsoever
Washington's enemies insist on apply
ing the two-thirds valuation basis to the
$15O rate in comparing Washington with
other cities. They figure that Washing
| tons true rate is not 81 80. but 81. If full
valuation is reported in other cities they
credit those cities with paying a true rate
equal to the actual rate. and on this err
roneous basis make comparisons with
Washington.
The census says of these statistics Of
reported basis of assessment: The fig
ures for both real and personal property
for most cities outside of these three
consin) are far from correct And 1t
extends this slur Of unreliability to the
statistics of rate of levy per $1,000 OF
reported true value. saying: The rates
based on the reported true value are
subject to all the errors in the estimates
to which attention was called in the pre-
ceding paragraph" A comparison of the
| assessments themselves in the light OF
known facts shows that Washington's
two-thirds valuation is nearer the actual
valuation of its realty than the so-eaiIed
full valuation In many OF the limited
number OF cities in which the nominal
100 per cent valuation is reported. There
| Is hardly any other city in the United
| States where the assessors assess SO near
to the true value Of the property as in
| Washington today.
| The census bulletin gives figures OF
tax ratio per 1900 Of assessed valua-
| ton and tax rate per $1,000 of esti-
mated true value, but by its slurs upon
the accuracy and reliability of the re-
ports made BY the various cities OF the
relation Of the assessed to the true val
uation destroys all value in these fig.
ures for purposes Of comparison be-
tween the cities.
The George report says:
On personal property the tax rat.
Is Ia per cent of the full true value
On real estate the tax rate as applied
!. Is less The Commissioners call 1t II
per cent on two-thirds of the value
which would make the rate / per cen
II the assessor had assessed the tru,
value. But he has not The assessmen
shows approximately but ~ per cen
OF the true value. so that IL per cen
on theoretical two-thirds reduces 1t
SELF to 066k of l per cent on the tru.
valuation. Therefore the real estate ia,
rate which looks like one dollar in tn,
hundred turns out to be only 661s cent
in the 500. Surely this is an extraor
dinarily low realty rate for a larg
city"
The George report thus figures the ne
tax rate Of the District first to SO pc
thousand. since the basis Of assessmen
Is 66sS per cent, and then to 1885 pc
thousand on the single-tax imaginar
and confiscatory assessment Of the tru
value OF Washington's realty.
Baltimore pretends to assess at full
valuation. So 1t is credited with tn
same tax rate true valuation as OIL
assessed valuation. lie, $500 per thou
sand.
But the comparative figures of actua
realty assessment in the two cities shov
that Washington in assessing on the two
thirds basis gets nearer to the true valu
of the city's realty than Baltimore whicl
assesses nominally on 100 per cent 0
full valuation basis. The taxed Fraction
Of Washington's realty is assessed Oh
the nominal two-thirds basis at $3.50 30,
4S7. All of rich and populous and bus.
Baltimore is assessed on the 100 per cen
basis at $372.651, 500. Thus the Washing
ton assessors say that Washington
realty on the two-thirds basis is WORT
only $42. 100000 less than all Baltimore OF
the 100 per cent basis, and, figuring boil
cities on the 100 per cent basis. that tn
taxed fraction OF Washingtons realty i
worth S1.oo. S., DIS more than the Who'll
of Baltimore. with vastly greater wealth
resources and taxable values and 228. IS
greater population.
Unquestionably the Washington as
SCISSORS in reporting that two-thirds o
Washington realty was worth $3.50. co., 90
assessed this realty nearer its true val
uation in fact, than Baltimore. whicl
pretended to assess on q 100 per cen
relation to true value.
Obviously in the light Of these figure
in a comparison between the two cite
4 Washinston's assessment percentage o
true value should be 100 per cent an
Baltimore 66ss per cent Tor less) instea'
of the reverse. And in figuring on TIL