The Washington herald., 1915-10-17

On the full value of this corner. AS
SCISSOR Richards places its selling value
at sfoo'O. Its true value on the basis
or It's present gross annual ground rental
capitalized at .5 per cent. would be $5i3,-
lio. an extremely conservative estimate,
since F street property is even now
| doubling in value every fifteen years
ana has. therefore, ! per cent annual
increment over and above its actual
rental return.
Beneht for Community.
Were a $50 tax rate placed on this
tull value. it would produce an annual
tax OF $l3519," and Mr.. Browne goes on
10 reason that the lessor will be una BILE,
IN renewing his lease, to make the lessee
bear this increased burden. while the
community will get the benefit from the
expenditure of S13,579 taxes in place of
a,65' taxes. and the Federal govern
ment will Use A.6557 saved from the half
and-half' subsidy for the benefit of the
country at large"
Il shall propose on this particular
class of landed estatc--a business prop
erty growing rapidly In value with the
growth of the community tax rate
of 80 per hundred on its full true valuc
based on the capitalization of its gross
annual rent. in place of $50 rate based
selling value The increase in taxation
would he nearly 2f' per cent. yet the
holder would still possess in the property
great urcarned fortune. and the annual
uncarned increment will more than pay
the taxes"
Wants Land Tax of 81.
Turning then to the small home prop
critics, Mr.. Browne advocates "A land tax
nf MOO
m"nts. and the abolition of the water tax
as to homes. Taking small house in
Emerson street northwest as an example
Mr. Browne says:
We're the tax rates suggest
adopted, the tax hill on the Elmer
son street property would drop
from. land Observation-Disclosures. 81
Improvements ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. l1'D
Water tax ......................... 90
Total NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. S2iA
exempt ................. "W
Water tax abolished. 900
Reduction NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. .Sli.lS
What this would moan to the tens Of
Of clerks and ware-"arncrs
in the District in similar circumstances.
a gross reduction Of over g.. .0'0, GC0 in tax
" tlON on tntll MONIES. Nllttu''r o"1l''l vi
rented is worthy of serious consider
alton"
The contention Of advocates of the
half and half" plan. that the with
drawal from taxable area OF ground for
streets and parks decreases the tax re
,"ipts OF tn" District Mr.. Browne COM
bats Mt some length. He claims:
!. That the potential tax returns from
streets and alleys are more than com
n"nsatcd for by the increased value of
adjoining property
>. That the value OF land lies in com |
EDITION for its uses and development: |
hat the withdrawal from tn. tax rolls !
Of larg" areas for parks simply en-
lances the Valu" Of adjoining pr0p' rtv-
md therefor" itS tax InvnIcnts-whil" .
he withdrawal "f "na ;i"rC Of ground 4.
rom settlement. adds t. the value of 7
'thcr areas for thu "rNrlnvmcnt nf which .
competition is So much tho Ike, nrr
Does any ono even IN" strongest adj
'ocat" Of tn" 'half-and-haIf' cuntcn-
ion. think fOr moment that the
ibolition of tn" parks. their sale and re-
u'n to private Use and tho taxable area.
would !ncreaS" tn" taxable land values
II the District? No. All land values
would slump. first from the addition of
l"w areas competing for purchasers and
occupants. second from the social in
urr to the community"
Although denying that the ground