Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-06-20


tax rate this confessedly grossly mis-
leading factor of calculation The re-.
suit will be worthless a. measure OF
comparative tax burdens.
Confessions Of Inaccuracy.
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 &C.
curacy of the statement Of the relation
of the assessment to the true value.
said:
Ever since Minnesota became a state
we have had a 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 its true and full value or.
with few exceptions. has any serious
attempt ever been made to so assess 1t.
The uniform, universal custom has been
to assess at from % to so per cent of
actual value: and this custom has had
the long continued approval of the peo-
Pile, the silent support Of the law-mak-
quiescence of the law-enforcing depart
ments of the state government"
AS in Minnesota. so in many other
states nominal 100 per cent valuation
means only from 26 to SO per cent. and
nominal valuations less than 100 per
cent turn out in most cases to be in
practice about one-half Of the reported
valuation.
The fact that In a Washington as
sessment a nominal 663s per cent means
an actual 20 per cent, while in most
other cities a nominal 100 per cent
means an actual so per cent. and nom
inal so per cent means an actual rs per
cent. explains the amazing discrepan-
cies which confront us when Washing
tons realty assessment is compared
with that of larger and richer cities.
In many states where the same as
sessment serves as the basis of calcu-
lating state, county and city taxes there
is open competition in underasSessment
between the city and country sections
each determined that as compared with
the other it shall not be required to pay
an undue and excessive proportion Of
the state and county taxes. Universal
undera ssessment oonfessed1y results.
Moreover, Washington contends that
assessors in many other cities, polit-
ically elected or appointed, confessedly
inject into their assessments the factor
and that a certain percentage Of under
assessments. especially in regard to
business properties, is there inevitable
and expected. In Washington, where
tne assessor Is not electeO OF appoint
ed by the taxpayers, and is not reSpon-
sible to them or to any faction among
them, and where Congress has further
protected the assessor against local in
fluence by giving him stable tenure of
office and guarding him against local
influence exercised even through the
Commissioners, underassessments on
political grounds are eliminated. and
underassessments through personal IA
voritism are reduced to. q minimum.
he re hA oft
ward comparative advertisement in
stead of undera ssessment, since Con-
gress, to whom the assessor is respon-
sible, has in successive years through
some Of its representatives been. con;
stantly prodding him to higher and
higher assessments of different classes
of property. now of unimproved land in
accordance with .single-tax principles;
and now of business property. which. in
accordance with the habit elsewhere
1t results from these successive and
varied boosttngs. in different years that
the Washington assessment Of realty
averages (the assessor reports) slight
ly more than the legal minimum rates
and reported relation of s. 2-3 per cent
In those other cities where the nomi-
nal and reported relation is 100 per
cent the actual relation ranges from %
similar shrinkage and discrepancy in
cities where the nominal and reported
relation is less than 100 per cent.
The figures Of comparative tax burden
resulting from use Of this standard Of
measurement are shown to be mislead-
ing and worthless. not only By the etn-
sus authorities In -discusainE- tae. basis
ON which these figures rest and by the
admissions Of tax officials in states and
cities, but by the 8rotesque 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 n
factor In measuring comparative tax
burdens. 90