Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-03-14
Our Tax-Burden Distinctly
Heavier Than That of Most
American Cities.
POINTED LESSONS FROM
1912 CENSUS FIGURES
Our Assessment Basis Should Not Be
Rehabilitation Should Not Cut
Down Half Provision.
NO. XII.
BY THEODORE w. MOVES.

In the last analysis every one
OF the assaults upon the half-and-
halt law turns in final decision
upon the answer to be given to
the question: rs the Washing
tonian already paving as much
tax as he ought?" If his tax-bur-
den is now as heavy as should
fairly be imposed no reasonable
American, whether in or out OF
Congress, will favor doubling or
increasing by fifty per cent his tax
assessment; or shifting from the
strong, broad shoulders OF Uncle
Sam to those OF the feeble local
community any further portion OF
the nations burden OF capital
making; or blistering the Wash
ingtonian with perjury-promoting,
veracity-punishing new taxes; or
extorting from him without due
consideration alleged ancient debts
that died, buried and decayed
forty years ago, and that, resur-
rected, violate all the decencies
by stalking abroad in their grave
clothes.
The comparative tax-burden OF
the Washingtonian has already
been measured in detail in the
light OF the census figures OF 1910.
Study OF the recently published
census statistics OF 1912 develops
that the comparative tax-burden
Of Washington has, increased
within the two years not only abb
solutely and substantially, but in
its relation to the other American
cities. The lessons taught by the
1910 figures are confirmed and
strengthened by the figures of
1912.
The burden imposed by Con-
gress upon the local taxpayers is
fully as heavy as that which the
average self-governing municipal
ity imposes upon itself, and in
view of the capitals lack of tax
able resources and other peculiar
disabilities under which the Dis
trict of Columbia labors, its tax is
harder to bear than that Of the
average American community.
!. Washington. tax levy. combining
tax rate and assessment and measuring
higher per capita than that Oh az
,f the 1874 other American cities In 1872.
=. In comparing the per capita tax
levy Of Washington with TINT Of other
cities 1t IN to be considered that the
contribution In lieu of taxes OF the
largest tauasD taxpayer II, In WASH
tnEton's case. omitted from the cal
euiation. IL is IL the steel trust and
other great piant-OSvning corporations
we're omitted from he tax levy "f
Pittsburgh. II Uncle sam wns treated
in the calculation as single taxpayer,
his tax contribution added to the levy
and his own name added to the popuin-
lion, Washin gt0n's per capita would ne
doubled. amounting to $3i-5O. Srenter
per capita than that Of any other city
in the United states. more than
doubling Philadelphia, Baltimore and
Ncw orleans. aud nearly doubling Chi
caxO. Cleveland and Milw aukee.
Z, Not one of the cities with which
Wasb,uRton ts compared has 40 large
percentage of hoaling nOn-taAPa!tuE
population AS the Capital, with It's one
third negro population and It's thou
sands Of temporary visitors aud the
KOyernment employees, and this non
ta1paying population reduces the
nomjpaI per cnpitn tax levy without
reducing IT In fact by cash confrfbu-
ions Not ono of the cities enumerated
ms 50 few mOney-makinE resources
~ manufactures, trade aud commerce
!. nrouortion to It's population, TO meet
sh,. drntu Of taxation.
a. clearly WashingtOn's tax levy not
nnIv averages up in actual figures with
those Of other American cities, but for
the reason stated IT must be doubled In
order TO make n fair comparison Win
other cities, and even without thlf
doubIing Its tax-burden In, owing u
r.. pecuiiar conditions, harder 10 hs
borne than that OF any other munici'
patty with approximately the same
census figures Of tax levy.
Accurate Measure of Tax Burden.
The following table gives the per cap