Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-05-13


tional taxes from which the salaries OF
its congressional legislators are PAID
The Washington taxpayer mus pays III
his national taxes for this leslslauVe
expense.
no should not nay what is paid in the
ner capita levies Of other Americans Tor
that privilege Not having any of the
benefits or privileges of statehood and
state government. he should not De
viewed as escaping Just oel1sat1on IL ne
pays no state taxes.
In comparing the Washingtonian's tax
burden with that of the taxpayer OF an
other city it is possible and 1t Is 1alr
only to compare the local munlcipai taxes
constituting a fund to which only the
city taxpayers contribute ana winch IL
spent exclusively in the city and for
municipal purposes. In this comparison
county taxes do not figure unless the
city and county are Identical: and state
taxes do not enter into the calculation at
all.
The Proper Comparison Basis.
Thus the Washingtonian's taxes are
properly compared, for instance. only
with those which the. st. Paulite pays as
a st. Paulite and not with those which
he PAYS in addition as a Minnesotan, or
as a taxpayer in the Minnesota county
in which St. Paul is situated.
AS a county taxpayer the st. Paullte
Joins with taxpayers outside of st. Paul
to create a tax fund to be spent In large
part elsewhere than in st. Paul. The
contributors to the fund are not all st.
Paulites; the purposes OF its creation are
not solely St Paulite: its expenditure Is
not exclusively in St. Paul.
As state taxpayer the st. Paulite
pays money into a fund to which thou
sands of Minnesotans outside of St l'aui
also contribute. a fund which is not To-
cally st. Paulite in purpose. in theory
or In fact.
The city tax. the county tax and the
state tax stand each on its own bottom.
They are separate and distinct in person.
mel of contributors. in purpose of crea-
ton in scope of distribution
Washington has not the benefit of out
side contributions to county tax. or to
state tax. in the enjoyment of which it
participates. 1t has no county or state
relations or privileges or benefits.
Why then. should comparison of the
municipal tax burden of the Washingto-
Man as a Washingtonian with that of the
St Paulite as a st. Paulite be complicat-
ed, confused and rendered meaningless
by dragging into the calculation the state
tax of the ST. Paulite as n Minnesotan.
in his relation with thousands OF other
Minnesotans. for the enjoyment of state
privileges and benefits and the mainte-
nance of state machinery of administra-
ton?
The Congress of the United States cor
responds in the case of the District to a
state legislature, and consequently state
taxes are in its case merged in its ma
tional taxation
When Washington is part of a state and
enjoys the expenditure within it OF its
due share of the state fund to which
thousands Of state citizens outside of its
limits contribute 1t will he time to per-
nit state taxation to enter into its COM
parative per capita tax figures. Munich
pal taxation. state taxation and national
taxation must logically and fairly be
compared separately in the different
cities. Municipal per capita figures of
the census bulletin are, therefore, prop
erly compared unaffected by considera-
tion of either state national tas for
instance, internal rcvenue) tax burdens.
National Taxation.
The Washingtonan makes a strong
comparative showing as a contributor to
the national taxes. The District has
shared in every such tax and has I'M
dergone special national burdens. Through
its custom house it has made contribu-
tons to the national Treasury, and If
the consumers of dutiable goods pay this
tax it has contributed far above the av-
eraSe of municipalities. as one of the
large seacoast cities. which are recog-
niZed as the heaviest consumers OF i'm
ported and dutiable articles.
In the recent House debate Represent
alive Prouty submitted a table in which
he had distributed the Ss.I0ooo paid
last year by the nation for capital main
tenance among the states. according To
population. and credited each state with
contributing approximately that amount
toward the expenses of the District. OF
course. no such contribution is actually
made. The different congressional con
stituencies and the different states con
tribute to the national taxes in widely
varying amounts. Many constituencies
do not contribute as much to the national
taxes as the District itself does, and il
is hard to figure out how some of the
constituencies pay any national taxes al
all. IT the graduated income tax on in
diViduals displaCes the other nationa
taxes. and it comes to pass that the only
uational taxpayers are the less than hall
a million income -boastnS citizens out
of fiinety-tive millions of Americans, il
Will be still more difficult to trace Il spe
ciiic contribution in national taxes to th'
National Capital mendIcant by the III
di2nant congressman outraged con
stitGency.
The only national taxes that fail direct
| " and Enthusiastically and in ascertaina BILE
amounts upon Americans are the inter
nal revenue taxes. The states and terri
| tories which contributed in the fiscal veal
| ended June 80 1909, less in internal rev
emile collections of the national Treasury
| than the District of Columbia are Ala
| bama. Arkansas. Delaware Georgia
| Idaho, Kansas. Maine. Mississippi
| Nevada. North Dakota, Oklahoma. South
| Dakota, South Carolina, Utah. Vermont
and Wyoming tsixteen states, and Alas
ka. Arizona, New Mexico and Hawai-
| -four territories).
| The per capita contribution of the Dis
| trict of Columbia for that year is greater
than that of Alabama, Arkansas. Connec
ticut. Delaware. Georgia. Idaho. Iowa
| Kansas, Maine. Montana, Minnesota, Mis-
| sissippi. New Hampshire. North Dakota
| Oklahoma, South Dakota, South Carolina
| Tennessee, Texas. Utah. Vermont ant
| Wyoming uwentytwo states). and Alas
| ka, Arizona, New Mexico and Oklahoms
| -four territories)
| The District of Columbia contributed il
the fiscal year ended June 30. 1909. II
| internal revenue taxation for the supper
| Of the national government more thar
| the combined contributions OF Maine
| Vermont, Mississippi. North Dakota. Ne
Nada. Oklahoma and Wyoming.
! The per capita contribution of thu
! Washingtonian to this national fund wa
| seventeen times great as that of thu
resident of Alabama. eighteen times tina
| of the resident of Arkansas, ten time
that OF the resident of Maine, sixteel
times that Of the resident of South Caro-
lima. twenty times that OF the resident o
| Vermont and eighty-six times that o
the resident of Mississippi
| Does not the Washingtonian pay enough
| both in national and local taxes? Is h.
in any respect favored by the legislativ
body. which. not chosen by him. decide
for him all questions of equitable taxa
ton?