Evening star., 1920-01-10
YARDST|CKFO FOR
MEASURING TAX
BURDEN Of CITIES
Tax Rate Plus Full Valuation
Not a Safe or Accurate
Measure.
PER CAPITA TAX LEVY
THE SAFEST STANDARD
Minority" Report on Mapes Bill
Sets Forth the Soundest
Principle.
THEODORE w. MOVES.
Editorial Correspondence of The star.l

Editorial Correspondence of The Starl
What IS the reliable yardstick for
measuring accurately the comparative
tax burdens OF cities!
Can it be made by joining tax rate
. to assessed valuation of taxable prop
crty. when full valuation is command
ed by law? Or by joining tax rate
to full valuation of taxable property,
as reported. estimated or guessed by
Tom Dick and Harry, officially or un-
officially?
Is there any other reliable method
of measurement than by comparison
of the dollars OF actual tax levieS and
tax receipts in the respective cities
which constitute their real tax bur-
dens?
The nominal majority of the House
District committee have adopted the
tax rate-plus alleged full valuation
standard of measurement. The nom
inal minority repudiate this yardStick
as fluctuating in length, worthless and
misleading, and insist upon measuring
relative tax burdens by comparing the
dollars of the tax money actually
levied or collected in the various
cities and per capitas based upon and
derived from these dollars of actual
tax burden.
Representative Mapes. reporting
favorably upon his bill to repeal the
half -and half law says for the nomi-
1.-The taxes paid by the residents of
the District of Columbia. based upon
true valuation of their property, are
very much less than the taxes, figured
upon the same basis. paid by the resi-
dents of any other city of the United
States which approached Washington
in population and advantages.
Its (Washington's) tax rate is
about one-half the tax rate of the
average city of it's size in the United
States. based upon the same valua-
ton of its property.
"1t requires no extensive argument
to convince the impartial student of
affairs that the citizens of no other
city in the United States which ap-
proaches Washington in size or ad-
vantages enjoys anywhere near as
low taxes as do thyse of the District
Of Columbia. The truth of that state
ment has been demonstrated time and
time again and the experience of
those who pay taxes in other mu-
uicip~ ~lities confirms it,
How "Undertaxing'' Is shown.
The demonstrations" of this al
legged undertaking of the Washing
tonian have been based on compari-
sons of tax rates, modified by guesses
at the relation of assessed to true
value in the different cities. The real
demonstration of the census hgures.
of the confessions of tax officials and
of practical experience is that the re-
ports of what constitutes true valua-
tion in the various states and cities.
with few exceptions, vary widely from
the truth and from one another, and
are absolutely unreliable and mislead-
ing as an accurate standard of meas
uring comparative tax burdens.
The confirming experiences of
those who pay taxes IN other mu-
nicipalities' We're much in evidence
in the recent House committee hear
ings, and. coming from members of
the District or appropriations COM
mittees, evidently constituted the
foundation upon which the report Is
Lanham reported that in respect to
a $4 GOO Texas property he paid tax
rate of s33 per 1000 on full valua-
ton" Representative Drane report
ed that on full valuation Jackson
Vile, Fla. paid 1888 per thousand;
Tampa and Lakeland. Fla. $40 per
thousand. Representative Sisson report
ed that on full valuation Winona,
Miss. paid $3.50 per $1,000; Louisville.
Ky, $27.20; Memphis, Tenn, $34.So, and
Dallas. Tex. $3.50.
Since Washington pays $1.50 on not
less than two-thirds' of full valuation,
it is concluded that the cities named
bear tax burdens twice, three times ana
four times that of Washington. and that
the capital is, therefore, only half taxed
OF OUe-tnlTu tdASu VI III eeA<>SN'
Measure Plainly Faulty.
But there are two other alternative
conclusions that one may reach: Cd
That the yardstick of measurement is
faulty and does not measure accurate
ly; or CD that if the cities named are
really so much more heavily tax-bur-
dcHed than Washington, the latter is not
undertaxed, but the former are grossly
and mexcuSably ovcrtaxed.
Let us take the cities of a western,
Il northern and a southern state which,
like Washington, have Il low rate and
"A high standard of assessment, and COM
pare their tax burdens measured by the
Ssson yardstick with those of the sam
pie cities cited in House committee Eek
perience meeting"
If this comparison demonstrates
that these sample cities of Florida,
Mississippi, Texas and Kentucky are
taxed twice and three times as
heavily as all the cities of Ohio, Rhode
Island and Virginia, as well as the
District of Columbia, will not the in
evitable conclusion be either that the
District committees sample cities are
grossly and shamefully overtaxed or
CONTINUED on Third Page.)