Evening star., 1919-06-26

WashinKton's tax burden with those Of
other municipalities, and Chat other
Items are equitably excluded, no COM
parable benefits being enjoyed by
concerned. Statistician Beales of the
census bureau discusses elaborately
and ably this theory in the memoran-
dunn accompanying his tables which
were submitted to the joint fiscal COM
mittee and are found at pages 1s6-24s
of the report of the hearings.
Statistician Beales analyses state
and county benefits of city residents
and separates those in respect to
which Washington enjoys comparable
benefits and which in his opinion
should be equitably added to the CAPT.
lutely fair comparative tax burden for
the Washingtonian. The discussion Is
Illuminating, and several columns OF
interesting and significant comparisons
result.
State Taxes Included in Our Com
parsons.
60 But in our hearings before the
Joint committee, we did not confine our
selves to comparisons OF per capita tax
burdens involving only the factors
which we thought equitable and truly
urements. In order to avoid the very
criticisms which Mr.. johnson, Mr.. Crisp
and Mr.. Juul make. we added certain
columns OF comparison to our taoies
which compared washington city taxes
with the full city. county and state
taxes Of other cities. We protested
that these comparisons were unfair and
misleading, and stated our reasons Tor
so denouncing them; but as curious in
formation. and for what they were
worth, we stated them.
And 1T appears that Warrington. en-
joying hardly any OF the state bene.
fits and mot all of the county benefits,
bears a tax burden in its city taxes
alone which brings 1t almost up to the
level of the combined full city. county
other comparable American cities.
In presenting these comparisons OF
municipal tax burdens to the Joint
committee, Washington has not linn
tied them either in accordance with
the views of those who would exclude
all state taxes. or of those who would
include all county and state taxes, or
of those who would include only equi-
table portions of state and county
taxes. For the convenience Of the
committee and of Congress, we have
presented the figures which show
forth all three views. We have COM
pared American cities from fifteen
different angles or bases Of compari-
son. Everybody except those who are
welded to Mr.. Johnson's misleading
standard of measuring tax burdens by
comparing tax rates. will find in the
figures submitted by US to the joint
congressional committee some column
or columns which he will approve as
equitably measuring the comparative
tax burdens of cities.
Taxes Compared From Every Angle
The infinite pains which we have
taken to avoid the exclusion from our
comparisons of any factor which .rea-
sonably or unreasonably can be fig
ured in this calculation is vividly H.
lustrated in our table (pages 267-s
of Report of Hearings Before Joint
Fiscal. Committed. which compares
eleven typical American cities under
fourteen different heads or bases of
comparison, including in column 9,
per capita receipts from all munich
pal taxes. plus per capita receipts
from all county and state taxes. No
one who carefully studies this table
and reads the summary of Washing
toms taxation conditions. printed in
our brief and at pages Is to 70 of
Report Of Hearings. will assert for
moment to the suggestion of an un-
fair manipulation of the figures for
Washington's benefit: