Evening star., 1920-01-11
Assessment Exceeds That of
So Out of So Largest
Cities in u. S.
EXEMPT PROPERTY
GREATEST IN CAPITAL
Many Non-Taxpaying Transients
and Small Industrial
Resources Here.
THEODORE w, MOVES

AA11SOSNG w. NS I<o.
Editorial Correspondence Of The starl
In this column of yesterdays Star
the census figures were given which
showed that Ohio, Virginia and Rhode
Island, like the District of Columbia,
raised their tax money by applying
a low tax rate to a high assessment.
and that all four differed in this re-
spect from states like Illinois. Iowa.
etc, which raise substantially similar
tax revenues by applying a high tax
rate to low assessment.
Is there any indication that the
Washington standard of assessment is
higher even than the high standard
that prevails in the cities of Ohio.
Virginia and Rhode Island"
Taking Cincinnati as a sample city,
full valuation in Ohio. though high,
is obviously somewhat less than the
full valuation" of the Washington
assessor. Cincinnati is larger in area
than Washington by nearly 1000 acres.
1t has $4,000 larger population, and is
a prosperous, busy, commercial city,
full of costly industrial plants. and
With HedIlS dll IT'S realty Oh tUt ldA
list. Taxable Washington is only
| fraction of the total realty. the ex-
empt realty aggregating s36S. .O0O, goo.
Nevertheless the Washington assessor
says that on full valuation the taxed
| fraction of Washington is worth $615,-
260,414, or $122,113.114 more than the
Cincinnati assessor says the whole OF
that great city is worth (s493, 3,0S7, ,300).N.
Clearly the Washington assessor
! applies higher standard of assess
ment in determining what constitutes
full valuation than the Cincinnati
assessor.
Our assessor puts the full value of i,
the national exempt property in
; Washington at S36S. .635,6S0. If this
! sum be added to the sum fixed by our
assessor as the full value of all the
taxable real estate in 1918 there will
result. as the assessors estimate of
the full value Of--aIl Washington.
! S9S3S96.G94, greater valuation by
| s236.l10,5S4 than that placed hy the
Cleveland assessor upon that great
! city, valuation greater than that
! placed by the assessors upon any
other city in the United States. ex-
cept New York. Chicago, Philadelphia
and Boston; greater valuation. by
$S6,672.9U5. than those put by their
assessors on Cincinnati. Providence
and Richmond combined.
Surely there is very pointed sug-
gestion in these figures that Wash
| ington'S standard of assessment is
higher than even the high standards
of Ohio, Rhode Island and Virginia
ircites.
minority" Find Capital Fairly Taxed.
! Discarding the full valuation false
pretense standard OF measurement. the
minority of the District committee
| have compared in the aggregate and
per capita the actual dollars of tax
levy and tax receipts raised in the
respective cities. on the theory that
these dollars constitute the real tax
r burdens that are to be compared
Their thoughtful and deliberate
conclusions are thus expressed in
/ their report:
"The property taxes paid by citi.
zens of Washington are fairly COM
parable in every way to the taxes
paid by citizens of other cities similar
to Washington in resources and pop-
uIntiOn. when il il considered
that the vast holdings of the govern
ment are exempt from taxation and
that n large part of the most yaI-
uable realty i'm the District iS govern.
ment property, and when il is further
considered that approximately one
quarter of the city's population is
cOiOred and pays "A small proportion
of the taxes and thar many thouxands
more of it's Inhabitants are govern
ment employees. most of whom pay n
small tax and many of whom pay none
at all. 1t would sem its citizens are
sufficiently taxed wIen it's per capita
realty and general property taxes ex-
cced those of n majOrity Of American
cities of over 100000 population. 1t
| il our conclusion, therefore, that the
people of the District are now taxed
fairly and reasonably
Analysis of Washington Taxatfou.
Washingtons realty tax burden 10
heaVy. Its tax rate is moderate, but
its assessment is high, compared with
that of other cities. Its per capita
out of the 6S largest cities of the
United States-all the cities of the
United States having over 100000
population. excluding itself.
1t is perhaps the only city in the
United States whose realty assess
ment actually forms a higher per-
centage of true value than the nomi-
nal and reported percentage. Accord
ing to the census bureau the reported
relation of assessed to true value of
real estate in Washington is 662s
per cent. That is, under the law
here, which requires that the as
sessment shall be not less than two
thirds, it is rated at 662s.
The actual relation. the assessor
has declared. averaged 20 per cent in
1915. In other cities. with few ex-
ceptions. the actual percentage rela-
ton of assessed to true valuation is
from one-third to three-fourths of the
reported percentage relation.
Since the imposition of the tax on
intangibles Washingtons personally
tax burden is reasonably high. The
tax on the franchise, good will, etc,
of public utility corporations-such
as gas. electric lighting and telephone
companies, banks and trust compa-
nies, incorporated savings banks.
building associations, etc, measued by
a percentage of the gross receipts
(Which in Washington is unusually
heavy)-is not classified by the CEN
sus authorities personally tax,
but in fairness should be thus con-
sidered in comparisons with other
cities.
Washington's property tax burden,
combining it's realty tax and it's per-
sonalty tax, is heavier than that OF
most American cities, and averages
up with that of cities approximating
it in SIZE and general conditions. One.
hundred and seventy-six out of 22l
American cities over 10000 in popu-
lation bear lighter burden. None
Of the group of neighboring cities
and only one of all the southern
cities show a higher property tax
per capita.
Comparing All Tax Receipts. .tt
Washington's tax burden. measures