Evening star., 1920-04-08
NO STATE TAX Since
N0STATE BENEFITS;
NO 0VERTAXAT|0N
Only Tiny Tax Increase Need
ed, Even if Full State Tax
Unfairly imposed.
THEODORE w. MOVES.


other cities is larger than that OF
Washington, but only by n small frac-
ttOn. And the increase of Wash
inEt0n's tax burden by twO-thirds, or
by One-thfrd. IN grossly excessive II
the purpose IL merely to overcome the
alton. which appears If Washington
Is unfairly taxed for what it does
not get.
=. II FULL state and county taxes
are included in the calculation Wash
tnEtOn's tax-burden. In order to be
would need to he increased only 10 tG
Is per cent, instead Of GO 2-3 per cent
or 33 Ia per cent. az sugEestcd.
3. NO state taxes should enter into
intercfty cOmparisOnS with Washing
/ ton. The capital does not enjoy the
| most important state benefits to which
state taxation entities the citizen Of 8
| state.
4. FULL state and county taxation
should not In any event enter into
| these intercity companions will
| Washington. See Bealea' equitable de.
ductiOns from such taxes in hearings
of 1915 and OF December. 1919. Also
column six of table comparing twelve
| typical cities. Hearings. House Dis.
| trfct committee. page 135.
| s. II either nll state taxes or equit-
able proportions of state and county
| taxes on the Beales theory are elm
mated from the calculation Washing
tons tnx-burden averages up will
! those OF other cities without any In.
crease whatever.
State Taxes and City Tax Comparison
The slight excess of tax burden Of
! other cities. when full state. county
and city taxes enter into the calcu.
| lations. disappears il state taxes are
| omitted from the calculation (as they
| should be) or if the Beales equitable
! deductions from state taxes. in com.
pairing Washington with other cities
| be made.
In regard to the bearing of the
| county and state tax on the com
PARSONS, it is to be remembered that
| county taxes are figured by the
| census authorities in all the cities
of more than 100000 population. be.
| cause these cities dominate the coun.
y, ties and the city and county are prac.
tically viewed as one.
! In regard to state taxes, in con.
/ gressional debate 1t has been charged
that the Washingtonian receives the
same benefits through his City gov
ernment alone that are enjoyed BY
| the residents of other cities through
their city. county and state govern
| ments; that. the WashingtoniaH'ac ctty
tax siiotfld equal the combined city
county and state taxes eof residents
-.
toniaias in the Beales or Grogan tables
and in all their. calculations unfairl!
! excluded all county and state take:
from consideration.
! We deny that Washington IRE
| ceives the same benefits that arr
| enjoyed by the residents Of Other
| cities through their state and county
! relations and governments. We deny
! that all state and county taxes with
out exception equitably enter inte
/ the comparison of city tax burdens
! We deny that we have excluded from
our comparisons Of city tax burden!
| even the unfair comparison of Wash
ington.s city tax with the combined
! city, county, and state taxes OF othe!
cities.
Many of us contend that all state
| taxes should be excluded equftabl!
from the comparisons Of city tax bur.
| dens, that (a) taxes to he. .equitab1!
| compared should be paid by con-
tributOrS substantially in the sam.
area. to- be. distributed to benedcinrieI
In the anme area and for the beneh
! of that area alone; TINT in the liGh
| of this principle the municipal tn1
and state tax are ms wide apart nj
the poles, being separate and distinc
In personnel Of contributors. In pur
pose Of creation, in scope and area O.
distribution; that OBJ WaahinEtOl
/ does not "rece1ve the same benefits
: thnt accompany State c1tlzenShIps un@
| should not therefore bear the bur
dens which compensate for thes'
benefits.
Varying Factor. OF Comparison.
/ /. Let us consider if the principle 1!
| not sound which requires that taxes
! to be equitably compared should b,
paid by contributors substantially IL
/ the same area, to be distributed t
beneficiaries in the same area. and fol
| the benefit of that area alone.
Large cities dominate or include thu
counties containing them; and in th'
! case of these large cities it is fair Il
! consider county taxes as well as cit.
| taxes. Indeed, in substance they ar
part of the city taxes. The taxpay
! ers, the beneficiaries, and the area TO
the collection and distribution OI
taxes are practically the same. r.
The cities having over 100000 pop
ulation constitute so large a part o
the containing county that the nom
ments are mainly city receipts AM
payments; and county taxes may i.
such cases be included in the com
parison without violating seriousl.
the principle that in comparing tn
Washingtonian's tax burden will
that of the taxpayer of another cit,
1t is fair only to compare local take
constituting fund to whic ch onl.
municipal taxpayers contribute, AM
which is spent exclusively in the cit,
and for municipal purposes.
But the municipal tax (sOmetimei
Including the county taxi and tn,
state tax aFe as wide apart ms tn,
poles. considered I'm the light of thi.
principle. They are separate and dis
tinct in personnel of contributors, 4,
purpOse of creation, in scope and are,
Of distribution.
fo,,
between Washington and Baltimor
there shorld equitably be compare,
what Washingtonians pay for ex
pendture in Washington and wha
Baltimoreans pay for expenditure II
Baltimore. What Washingtonian
cannot equitably be compared witt
what BaltimoreanS pay for expendi
ture in Baltimore plus what they pa,
as Marylanders for the maintenance
of a sovereign state and for expendi
ture in that state.
One might as well inject into tn
comparison Of city burdens a consid
eration Of what the BaltimOrean paw
in national taxes as an American 70
expenditure on account of the Unite,
States. including Baltimore.
In other words. the taxes that tn
Baltimorean pays as Marylander o
as an American have nothing to d
with city calculations and compari
sons In the different eases there ar
not the same persons contributing
not the same area within which ex
penditures are made and not tn
same beneficiaries Of these expendi
| lures.
Baltimore taxes are paid by Bal
timoreans only and are spent i,
Baltimore only. The Marylander
who are in Baltimore contribute stat
ltaxes in common with thousands out