Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1919-12-13

undertaxed. only half taxed. that the
haif-aRd-haif law is unjust 'iniqui-
tQus.' a screen behind which the under
! taxed Or half-taxed Washingtonian
! lodges mis- tax obligations, a dishonest
I arrangement which thrusts abstracting
hands into the national treasury"
Questions of Final Issue.
MIR. Noyes declares that the final is
sue of the pending bill is comprised in
these questions:
rs the half-and-half law shield
protecting against unjust and excessive
taxation the unrepresented taxed, al
ready bearing an equitable burden OF
| taxation? Or is it screen which hides
obligations? Shall it be preserved in
fairness to the people of the capital?
Shal it be destroyed as a swndle of
the nation?"
Mr. Moves proceeded next to analyze
| the tables prepared by Starke NJ
Grogan. statistician of the census bu-
reau (Which had been placed in evidence
earlier in the day by Mr.. mcfarland
These tables presented a compilation of
the comparative tax figures of Washing
tons tax burden in relation to those of
other cities from every conceivable view
point and covering a very wide range of
American cities. These comparisons
embrace four groups, one comprising
SiXty-eight cities over 100, 900 in popu-
lation. another nine. neighboring cities
over 10000 in population Il third twelve
southern cities over $4,000 in population
and fourth thirteen northern central
cities over 100000 in population.
Taxes Compared.
Mr.. Moves submitted table TO which
he called special attention. which COM
pared Washington's tax burden with
those OF eleven typical American cities
from every conceivable angle. These
cities included the nearest great cities
on the Atlantic slope. Washingtons
larger immediate neghbors on the
north, Baltimore and Philadelphia; the
two cities next larger than Washington
and the two next smaller. New Orleans,
Minneapolis, Seattle and Jersey City:
also the largest cities of Illinois. Mis-
sour. Indiana and Kentucny-tnat is.
apolis and Louisville-in all, the largest
cities in ten of the states. Mr.. Moves
urged that if Washington's tax burden.
measured by any standard and by ali
standards, averages creditably in COM
rarison with those of these eleven typi-
cal and wealthy American cities it can
not be held that the capitai is not equi-
tably taxed. His conclusion upon this
question was as follows:
SIN total tax burden, however meas
ured, the twelve cities find themselves
reasonably close together. but there is
a considerable variation in the weight
of different elements of this burden
For instance. Washington's burden on
IL d.
1t shows a comparatively large increase
in burden of other taxes on account of
the census inclusion under this head in
stead of under personal taxes of the
tax on the gross earnings of public utii-
ties and some other corporations. It's
tax on realty exceeds that of all but
three OF the other eleven cities When
personality tax is added five cities go
ahead of it on the total-Chicago, Phila-
delphia, Cleveland, Seattle and Min
vtfa.ly lie ,r-i,
New Orleans. Jersey City, indianapolis
and Louisville. six cities. behind it.
Leads All But Chicago.
when receipts from all municipal
taxes are compared Washington goes
ahead again of all the cities but Chi
cago. The relations are unchanged
when an equitable proportion of
county taxes is added. This results
from the fact that the census in re-
spect to all the cities but Indianapolis
and Louisville. which have less than
100000 population had already figured
the county taxes into the city figures.
When an equita BILE proportion of state
taxes is added Chicago, Cleveland.
Minneapolis, Seattle and Jersey City
go slightly ahead of Washington,
leaving the other six cities at lower
figure.
When to per capita receipts of all
municipal taxes per capita of all
county taxes il added Chicago leads
the list, with Washington second OF
fifty-eight cities over 100000 in popu-
| lation twenty-one exceed Washin gton
in this column and thirty-six are less
This. in my personal opinion, is the
most significant of the columns in the
reference comparisons so far as large
cities are concerned, in which the city
dominates the containing county. If
unfairly all county and state taxes
are added to per capita all municipal
taxes, nine cities go ahead of Wash
ington, leaving two behind it.
THE lowest per capita in this COL
umn is 20.55. and the highest is 2937;
that of Washington is 1913. If per
capita interest payments are deducted
to eliminate past and to provide for
present and future needs only, the
showing is reversed and only four of
the eleven cities show larger per
capitas than Washington. So close
does Washington come to exceeding
in it's city burden the full combined
city. county and state burden of a
majority of these cities"
WashinEtOn's Exempt Properties.
In discussing realty tax 'levies Mr..
Noyes said that in one important re-
spect the comparison of the census is
not fair to Washington. No account is
taken in the calculation of the heavy
taxable values held exempt from taxa
ton by the United States, on which as
a quasi taxpayer Uncle Sam pays
large -subvention in lieu of taxes. 1t is
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES