Evening star., 1915-03-29

in protest against this national con-
Does not the washingtonian pay
enough both in national and local
taxes? Is he in any respect favored os
the legislative body. which. not CHOSEN
by him, decides for him all questions
of eq -itable taxation?
Corporation Tax Not in Levy.
As an Offset to the objection that
county taxes do not In the ca"e OF some
of the cities enter into the census CAL
culation of Tux levy Is the fact that
taxes imposed upon the gross income"
Of public service corporations. banks.
ETC., in lieu Of personal taxes are not
considered In calculating the per CAPITA
tax levy. This kind OF tax is con-
spicuously heavy In WashinEton. 1T
should eqBstably he treated as part OF
the personal tax and figure In the per
capita tax levy.
Assistant Assessor Oyster has ana
lyzed the per capita tax levy figures OF
the various cities According TO his cal
culations the part of the personally
tax which is derived from the public
utility corporations. banks. trust com
panics. etc, and which does not enter
into the census per capita tax levy Is
greater in the case of Washington than
the part of the personal tax which does
enter into the census calculation. His
figures concerning Washington are:
Fer capita ts1-Real estate. .sii -
personally .-....--..-.- Id"
Banks, gas company. stree, railroads, etc. 2.ol
sl7.76
Mr. Oysters figures corroborats what
! have said as to the heavy realty tax
imposed on Washington compared with
that of other cities Here are some OF
the per capita realty tax levies in vari-
Louis. s11.75: Cleveland. sl1.42: Detroit.
s13.4T: Milwaukee, 1914; Cincinnati.
sl3s3: Denver. sls,s7: Omaha. $ll.s6'
Los Angeles. sl3.S5; New orleans
s1o.7s.
If Washington's personal tax. omit
ting the corporation personal tax IS
lighter than that OF many cities. ITS
The total tax levy. combining realty
and personally tax. averages hiSh
among American cities. Its personal
tax ought not to be increased as pro-
posed by the Johnson-Prouty amend
nent, unless It's excessive realty tax Is
correspondi.. :ly diminished. Between
Mr.. George on one side and Mr.. john
son and Mr.. Prouty on the other WASH
ington is threatened with heavy IN
crease of both real and personal tax
levy, raising the total per capita tax
levy. as we have seen. to a startling
total
Uncle Sam Not in Tax Levy.
In another respect tho comparison of
the census per capita tax ievies ts not
fair to Washington. No account tn
taken In the calculation OF the heavy
taxable value. held exempt from tax
alton by the United states. on which
as q quasi taxpayer Uncle Sam pays n
six-million dollar subventiOn in lieu of
taxes. II only part Of this subven-
tion is viewed representing realty
values owned by the United states and
withdrawn from the nsSessment roll
and tnx list. the addition of this part
of the fund to tho total tar levy in
calculating the per capita tax levy
would swell the latter to nn unbenr-
ably burdensome figure.
In comparing the per capita ta& levy
of Washington with that Of other cities
it is to be considered that the contribu-
tion in lieu of taxes OF the largest
tuuasD taxpayer is, in Washington :
case, omitted from the calculation Ii
is as If the steel trust and other great
corporations We're omit
ted from the tax levy OF Pittsburgh.
If Uncle Sam was treated in the cal
culatiou as Il single taxpayer. his tiiN
added to he levy ana his
own name ADDED to the popui;Itoi,
Washington'S per capita would be
doubled, amounting to s31.oO. greater
per capita than that of any other city
in the United States. more than dou-
bling philadelphia. Baltimore and New
Orleans and nearly doubling Chicago,
and Milwaukee.
There is no way OF handling the
question which makes it fair to omit
from the Washington calculation OF
per capita contribution all cousidera-
ton OF the amount paid in by the
largest property owner and quasi ts.-.-
payer.
Eliminate the governments exempted
property from considera tion and what
is there OF property and resources in
the remaining fraction of Washington
to cause it or to enable 1t to bear a
high per capita of tax burden? What
has it of business property values to
make it compare favorably with much
smaller American cities? Its mills. Its
factories. its great plants go lar as
exempted fraction of the city and DO |
not count in the local assessment and |
tax levy. Then there is the third OF the I
cOlOreu ana an eAtTaofui-
narily large percentage OF transients |
and taxpayers. How much per |
capita of tax levy could Philadelphia. |
Baltimore or New Orleans or Chicago, !
or Milwaukee or Buffalo. |
Cincinnati or Detroit afford to pay il
Its largest taxpayers. the owners OF its .
mills, the manufacturing plants, etc.
5ere omitted from the calculation and /
4 third of it's population was colored? |!
Not one of these cities has so large |
!, perceutage of floating non-taApaying
population as the capital with its one I
third negro population and its thou
.ands of temporary visitors and the
government employees, and this nom
population reduces the nom
nal per capita tax levy without reduc
pg il in fact by cash contributions.
Not one Of the cities enumerated has
80 few money making resources in
trade and commerce. in
proportion to it's population, to meet
his drain of taxation.
Clearly WaShnStons AK levy not
only averages Up iii actual figures with
hose Of other American cities, but for
he reason stated il must be doubled
n, order TO make Il fair comparison
With other cities. and even without this
lo,Ibii,ls its tax burden is, owing to
is peculiar conditions, harder to be
,ornc thau that of any other munici-
aiity with approximately the Same
.cnsus figures of tax levy. /