Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1915-10-20
Realty Taxes Not as Large.


Realty Taxes Not as Large.
Not one of these ten cities shows so
large a per capita of realty tax as
Washington: five exceed it in per
capita total property tax and five fall
below it: one exceeds it in per capita
total municipal tax receipts. while nine
municipal tax receipts are added equi-
table proportions of county and state
taxes. three cities exceed Washington S
per capita and seven fall below 1t. II
to per capita total municipal tax re-
ceipts are added per capita all county
and state taxes. six cities exceed WASH
ington's per capita and four fall be-
low it. II from the last comparison
tracted for all the cities. four cities
exceed Washington's per capita and six
fall below it. If the general govern
ment" item of state expenditures is
deducted from the per capitas of all
municipal. county and state taxes com
bined. five cities exceed Washington's
per capita and five fall below 1t. And,
finally, if from the last comparison per
capita interest payments are deducted,
four cities exceed Washington's per
capita and six fall below it.
Even in the comparisons which con-
tain elements that are unreasonable
and unfair to Washington, including
items In the per capita expenditures of
other cities for which they receive an
equivalent. while Washington receives
no corresponding benefit, Washington's
ngures show up creditably, being only
slightly exceeded by those for the
and exceeding in the cases of the
others the total of city, county and
state taxes with it's city tax burden
alone. Note how close together in act
ual dollars and cents we find the per
capita tax burdens of these eleven
cities In the most significant of the
comparisons. like those made in COL
umns 2. 8. and and even those in
columns 8. 10. 10 and IA of the refer
ence group of comparisons.
Summary.
very heavy. Its tax rate is moderate,
but Its assessment is excessively high
Its per capita realty assessment ex-
ceeds that of ffty-three out of the largest
hfty-eight cities of the United States.
United States whose realty assessment
actually forms a higher percentage of
true value than the nominal and re-
ported percentage. According to the
census bureau. the reported relation of
assessed to true value of real estate
In Washington is Sc 2-3 per cent. The
actual relation. the assessor has de-
CARED. averages 10 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 re-
1ation.
1t is difficult to find another Amert-
can city. fairly comparable with Wash
1ngton. whose realty tax burden ex
ceeds that of the capital
< "ashington's personally tax bur-
den is comparatively light Intangible
personality Of the individual is not
faxed ana the tax on the franchises.
good will. etc. of public utility cor
porations-such as gas, electric light
Ing and telephone companies-banks
and trust companies. incorporated saw
ms banks. building associations, etc,
measured by percentage of the gross
receipts (Which in Washington is un-
usually heavy. Is not CLASSIFIED by the
census authorities as a personality tax
Tag Burden Is Heavier.
8. Washington's property tax burden
combining its heavy realty tax and its
hight personally tax, is heavier than
.nose OF most American cities. anu
averages up with those of cities an
proximating 1t in size and general con
ditions: 1855 out of 1879 American cities
over 10000 In population bear a lighter
burden Only one of the neighborinp
o
southern cities show a higher property
tax per capita.
A. Washington's tax burden, meas.
ured by the per capita receipts from all
municipal taxes, including the taxes or
the sale of liquor and tobacco a nd
those on public utility corporations
oanks and trust companies. is distinct,
heavier than those of the American
cItles with which Washington is ap-
propriately compared. This comparison
fairly measures the respective burden,
of all city taxes. Washington's burdei
exceeds that of every one of the neigh
boring group of cities and of all In tn.
south. eleven out of thirteen of tn.
northern central group and forty-si,
out of fifty-eight of the general group
II equitable proportions of count,
and state taxes. representing certain
items of county and state expenditure,
from which the city man derives ben
ef1ts which are comparable with ben
ehts enjoyed by Washington, are addes
to the tax burdens of other American
cities. Washington's per capita ia,
burden is still above the average il
comparison with those for other cities
or the general group of fifty-eigh
cities thirty-seven are less heavily bur
dened than Washington Not one O
the neighboring group or of the south
ern group. and only four out of thir
teen of the northern central grou,
show as high per capitas as Washing
ton
sary to meet current expenses of tn
present and those OF city development O
the immediate future the per capita o
interest payments on Indebtedness rep
resenting expenditures of the past o.
improvements, graft, or gross extrava
gance may appropriately be deducted fl
the case of each city. When this is don
Washingtons tax-burden, to meet tn
needs OF present and future, is DISTINCT
heavier than those Of most of the othe
American cities with which IL is compar
able Not one Of the southern elite
or of the neighboring cities. only thre
OF the thirteen northern central cities
and only thirteen out of ffty-seven O
the general group of cities exclusive G
Washington are. according to this meas
urement. SO heavily tax-burdened a
Washington.
Creditable Comparison.
7. Washington's city tax-burden is 8
heavy that, even when compared wit
the total city. county and state tax-bur
dens Of taxpayers in other cities VIII
enjoy state benefits and privileges whic
are denied the capital. 1t shows up cred
itably IN the comparison. Its showing
still better when by the subtraction of ne