Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1918-12-20
SURPLUS CURE BY
TAXREDUCT|ON
Our Realty and 'Business"
Taxes Excessive When
Compared With Those of
Other Comparable Ameri-
can Cities.
CUT TAX, CURE SURPLUS
THEODORE W. MOVES,
Editorial Correspondence Of The Star.l

If the Commissioners may submit
In the estimates n full statement of
the Districts actual needs, and If
Congress will appropriate justly and
literally to meet these needs, there
will be no unexpended surplus of Dis
trict tax money under the ha1f-and-
half law. But If In the future, under
changed conditions, the creation of
such surpluses in large amounts is
found to be unavoidable, the wisest
effective remedy will be, not repeal Of
the half-and-half law, but decrease
of District taxation in a few particu-
lars in which 1t has been determined
authoritatively to be excessive in
comparison with that of other Ameri-
can cities.
The greatest benefit which the Dis
trict derived from the Investigations
Of the joint congressional committee
was the resulting careful and thor
ough comparison of the tax burdens
of American cities, measured by the
right standard. and the deliberate de-
cision, announced by the committee.
that the Washingtonian's city tax
burden is, in the aggregate, as large
as that imposed in comparable Amerl-
can cities, that, therefore. no more
than this aggregate should equitably
be exacted; and that any increase of
this aggregate burden as by the i'm
position of new tax should in
equity be followed by the correspond
ing reduction of the old taxes in par
ticulars in which they are conceded
to be excessive when compared with
those of other cities.
Our Tax Burden Large Enough.
What was before the Joint commit
tee upon which to base this just con-
clusion? Chairman Chiffon said in
the Senate debate that the statistical
foundation of the committees conclu-
sions was 1.-The complete report" con-
cerning comparative taxation, which
begins at page 207 of the Report of
the Hearings of the Joint Committee.
The census Office figures, thus adopted
and treated as authoritative by the
joint committee. are those utilized in
this editorial correspondence.
The census items of the aggregate
city tax burden are % realty taxes.
.(2) personally taxes, and (3) "other"
taxes, including business" taxes.
In the District the realty tax has
always been high and the personality
tax low. In 1902 Congress stiffened
the personally tax, put life and force
into the law and largely increased the
revenue from such taxes. AT the in
stance of the Senate, however, no tax
was placed upon intangibles. but many
and large license taxes on occupa-
ton, and heavy taxes on the gross
earnings of public utilities and bank
ing corporations were substituted in
its place. The tax on intangibles.
omitted in 1902 at the Senate's in
stance, is now, also at the Senate's in
stance, restored, and the substitute
for the tax on intangibles, which in
1902 was enacted, should now, in fair
ness, be eliminated or correspondingly
reduced. This readjustment is rem
dered eq-litable not only by what oc-
Cured in 1902, but by the recent de-
cision to which I have referred, by
the authorized agent of Congress- the
Joint committee, that the aggregate
tax burden of the District (without
regard to it's separate items) is al
ready suf1ciently large and should
not be increased.
Let us analyze some Of the compare
tive figures which were submitted to the
Joint committee and which convinced it
that Washington was already as heavily
tax-burdened in the aggregate as other
comparable cities, and that this total
burden could not equitably be made
heavier.
No Heavier Tax Burden.
In comparing the items constituting
the total city tax burden-that is, realty,
personalty and ''other'' taxes-it is nee
essary to explain that while at the Dis
trict building and in other municipalities
such tax as that on the gross earn
ings Of public utilities and some other
corporations is treated as personal tax
or the franchises of these corporations.
In the census office. on the contrary,
these taxes are classified, not as taxes
or personally. but as business taxes"
with the extraordinary and paradoxical
result that Washington, which. as COM
nared with the great commercial cities,
enioys a minimum Of business, is bur-
dened with a maximum of so-called bus
mess taxes.
census figures relieos upon by the joint
congressional finance committee. and Of
date prior to the enactment of the Dis
trict tax on intangibles) compares the
ner capita realty tax. the per capita
total property tax and the per capita
n,nnicipal receipts from all taxes in
eleven typical American cities, including
Washington:
-