The Washington herald., 1915-09-26

ment property, and that the total as
sessed value of taxable real estate for
the fiscal year ended June 50, 1915
aggregates only s390,309,27S.
The brief contains the following digest
of the per capita contribution of Wash
ington to the support of the Capital. and
a comparison with other cities based on
tabulations carried in the brief:
l. WashinSton's realty tax burden is
very heavy. Its taxation is moderate,
but its assessment is excessively high.
Its per pita realty assessment exceeds
that of fifty-three out of the largest fifty
eight cities of the United States. 1t is
perhaps the only city in the United States
whose realty assessment actually forms
higher per cent of true value than the
nominal and reported percentage. Ac-
cording to the Census Bureau, the re-
ported relation of assessed to true value
of real estate in Washington is &c % per
cent. The actual relation. the assessor
declares, averages 20 per cent. In other
cities, with few exceptions, the actual
percentage relation of assessed to true
value is from one-third to three-fourths
OF the reported percentage relation.
Tax Burdens Compared.
1t is difficult to find another American
city. fairly comparable with Washington.
whose realty tax burden exceeds that of
the Capital.
,. Washington's personally tax-burden
is comparatively light. Intangible per-
sonal property of the individual Is not
taxed, and the tax on the franchise. good
WILL etc, of the public utility corpora
tions-such as gas. electric lighting and
telephone companies-banks and trust
building associations, etc. measured by
percentage of the gross receipts (Which
in Washington is usually heavy is not
classified by the Census authorities as a
personally tax.
8. Washington's property tax-burden,
combining its heavy realty tax and its
light personally tax. is heavier than
those of most American cities, and
averages up with those of cities ap-
proximating it in size and general con-
156 out of 1879 American cities over
10000 in population bear a lighter bur-
den. Only one of the neighboring group
of cities and only two of all the Southern
cities show a higher property tax per
capita.
4. Washington's taN-burden, measured
by the per capita receipts from all mu-
nicipal taxes, including the taxes on the
sale of liquor and tobacco and those
on public utility corporations. banks and
trust companies. is distinctly heavier
than those of the American cities with
which Washington is appropriately COM
pared. This comparison fairly measures
the respective burdens of all city taxes.
burden exceeds that of
every one of the neighboring group of
cities and of all in the South, eleven out
of thirteen of the northern central group,
and forty-six out of ffty-eight of the
general group.
5. If equitable proportions of county
and State taxes representing certain
items Of county and State expenditures
from which the city man derives bene-
fits which are comparable with benefits
enjoyed by Washington. are added to
the tax burdens of other> American cities,
per capita taX-burden is
still above the average in comparison
with those for other cities. OF the gen.
eral group of fifty-eight cities, thirty
seven are less heavily burdened than
Not one of the neighboring
group or of the Southern group and only
Jour out of thirteen of the northern CEN
tral group show as high per capitas as
Taxes in Other Cities.
6. The measure of the taX-burden
necessary to meet current expenses of
the present and those of city develop
ments of the immediate future. the per
capita of interest payments of indebted
ness representing expenditures Of the
past on improvements, graft, or gross
may appropriately be de-
Quoted in the case of each city. When
this is done Washington's tax-burden, to
meet the needs of present and future, |
Is distinctly heavier than those of most
Of the other American cities with which
It is comparable. Not one of the south
ern cities or the neighboring cities. only
three of the thirteen northern central
cities. and only thirteen out OF fifty
seven of the general group Of cities (ex-l
elusive of Washington are, according to
this measurement, so heavily tax-bur-
dened as Washington.
7. Washingtons city tax-burden is so
great that, even when compared with
the total city, county. and State taxi
burden Of tax payers in other cities, who
enjoy State benefits and privileges which
are denied the capital. 1t shows up Gre
ditabfy In the comparison Its showing
Is still better when. by the subtraction
Of per capita interest payments, the COM
parison is limited to the tax burdens
for the present and future.
past graft or waste. Wash
lTe tOH tdA-UuTetn diOue heavier
than the combined city, county and State
taxes in such cities as Cleveland. In
dianapol Atlanta, Birmingham. Will
Wheeling, Philadelphia and
Newark, and within a few cents Of this
burden is such cities as
Baltimore and New Orleans.
When interest payments are eliminat-
ed, Washington's tax-burden (even under
the unfair standard of measurement en-
ployed against ~ is greater than that
Of any other group of nine neighboring
cities, of all but one Of the twelve south
ern cities, and of all but one Of the
thirteen northern central cities. Its
burden, thus measured. is greater than
that of such cities az Philadelphia. Cleve-
land. Baltimore. Cincinnati. Newark,
New Orleans. Jersey City. Indianapolisl
and st. Paul.
:. Ths grossest unfalrness to wash. J