Evening star., 1916-08-10
Confessions Of Inaccuracy.

will be worthless as a measure of COM
parative tax burdens
Confessions Of Inaccuracy.
(2) The census bulletins thus discredit
the accuracy of the reported relations
of assessed to true value except in
three states. Minnesota is one of the
states commended for comparative ac-
curacy of the statement of the relation
of the assessment to the true value
In 1912 the Minnesota tax commission
said:
Ever since Minnesota became a state
we have had law among our statutes
requiring that all property shall be as
sessed at its true and full value in
money Never since the first assessor
started on his thankless task has prop
erty of any kind in Minnesota been as
sessed at it's true and full value or,
with few exceptions, has any serious
attempt ever been made to assess it.
The uniform, universal custom has been
to assess at from 25 to SO per cent Of
actual value; and this custom has had
the long-continued approval of the peo-
pie, the silent support of the law max
ing, and, in large measure the acQuies-
cence of the enforcing departments
of the state governments"
AS in Minnesota, so in many other
states, whose tax officers are not SO
frank, nominal 100 per cent valuation
means only from 25 to SO per cent, and
nominal valuations less than 100 per
practice about one-half of the reported
valuation.
The fact that in Washington as
sessment nominal 663s per cent means
other cities a nominal 100 per cent
means actual so peri cent, and a
nominal so per cent means an actual 25
per cent. explains the amazing discrep-
ancies which confront us when Wash
ington's realty assessment is compared
with that of larger and richer cities.
The figures Of comparative tax burden
resulting from use Of this standard of
measurement are shown to he mfsIead-
ing and worthless, not only by the cen-
rus authorities i'm discussing the basis
on which these figures rest and by the
admissions of tax 0fncials in states and
cities, but BY the gr0teAque results
which follow acceptance Of the accu-
racy Of the reports Of the relation Of
assessed to true value and the attempt
to use this false reported relation as a.
factor In measuring comparative tax
burdens.
Fantastic Discrepancies.
(3) Assuming that the reported bases
OF assessment are accurate. the as
SCISSOR reports in the taxed fraction OF
non-industrial Washington realty val
ues amounting to s5os,79s,4s5. On the
same assumption the Cincinnati as
SCISSOR reports in the whole of that
populous. wealthy and money-making
city realty values of $375.065, ,6sO-$133,-
100000 less than in the taxed fraction
of Washington. The Newark assessor
reports $207, 100000 less of realty val
ues in that city than in Washington.
The New Orleans assessor reports
$2S5, 100000 less of realtv values in
that city than in Washington.
OF course, the reports of relation of
assessed to true value which develop
these preposterous results are false
and worthless. Instead Of Washington
realty being assessed at a two-thirds
rate, as compared with a three-quar-
ters valuation in New Orleans and full
valuation in Cincinnati and Newark,
the true relation will place Washing
ton at comparative 100 per cent and
the other cities at small fractions OF
full valuation.
The truth which I am urging is
taught not merely by a few selected
cities, but by the entire list.
in Mr.. Johnson's table are not the lat
est available and vary in their show
ing from the most recent census bulle-
tin on the ,subject-No. 126 for 1913.
iv unreliable and misleading in both
years, this difference Is of no conse-
auence. No more attention should be
paid to these guesswork irresponsible
figures of 1918 than to those Of the
wear (whatever 1t was) which Mr..
johnson utilized.
But the most superficial examinations
of these 1913 figures, purporting to
show comparative tax rates based on
reported true value. discloses that
Washington Is not the only American
city to be slurred as undertaxed by the
application of this false standard. Mr.
Joinson's 8 table gives that impression:
but il we enlarge somewhat Mr. John
sons table of forty selected cities and
use .fe figures of 1918. we find that
while Wasflington's tax rate on report
ed real value remains LOO, Chica1o's
(fs only l.02; st. Paul's is LOB; that Of
indianapolis is less than that Of WASH
ington-.o5. and among other citfeG
Portland. Ora. .a6: Atlanta, rs; Btr.