The New York herald., 1922-12-15
CITY in $2O,OOO,OO0
HOLE ON TAX RULING
Craig SAYS Courts Ban OH
Bank Levy May Force
Rise in Rates.
MUST REDUCE BUDGET
Comptroller Thinks Con-
gress Might Give Consti-
tutional Relief.
HOPES FOR ALBANY AID
Says Mandatory Legislation
Has to Be Cut or State
Must Meet Losses.
HOPES FOR ALBANY AID

The city will lose upward Of 500
100000 and the tax rate will go higher
by the recent decision of the Court OF
Appeals declaring unconstitutional
the one per cent. bank tax, unless
qualified by relief that must originate
In Congress and made effective by the
New York Legislature, according to
a statement issued last night by
Comptroller Craig
Between s12,000.oo0 and s13000000
of this sum has already been collected
and will have to be refunded with in
terest at the legal rate unless relief
is forthcoming. The remainder is
part of the resources of the general
fund pledged to meet the require
ments of 1922 and 1923 budgets, and
without the fulfillment Of that pledge
1t is impossible to meet the require
ments of those budgets, according to
Mr.. Craig.
The 1928 budget. totalng $353,350.-
e75.67, was based upon the assumption
that the city in 1923 would receive the
bank tax of more than s5,0o0,oC0. which
is due on December 81 next, and the
failure of the payment of this tax will
necessitate reduction in the budget Of
q like amount.
The Bank Tax Decision.
Mr. Craig's statement III part follows:
Last Tuesday the Court of Appeals
n In rd tn tuh is
known as the bank tax. This decision is
the result of provisions contained in the
State income tax law passed by the
Legislature in 1919. The inequalities Of
the income tax law as revealed byfthis de-
cision shoald bring to an end the fatu-
GUS legislative policy of stripping the city
CT New York of it's taxable resources
and at the same time saddling upon 1t
millions of dollars of liabilities created
by the State for State purposes, to be
financed. however. by taxes raised under
the compulsion of such legislation by
New York city.
''As / pointed out in opposing the
passing of the Income TAX law it should
have been more properly entitled: An
Act to grant Exemption from Taxa
tlOn. by It's prONlSlOf1S HufuTtuS Ol
millions of dollars of personal property
was stricken from the tax rolls of New
York city and throughout the state and
by similar provisions in the corporation
income tax law. further hundreds OF
millions We're in like measure stricken
from the tax rolls OF New York city.
"rhe taxes thus taken from the hum
dpeds of millions of property thereby
exempted were lost TO the city OF New
York, and its power to meet the liabli-
ties imposed upon it was to that ex-
tent curtailed. AT the same time in
order that the State might not suffer
by these wholesale exemptions. the
taxes required for State purposes were
levied against the incomes OF the
artisan, the salaried employee. the
small merchant and industrial workers
throughout the State, who under the
stress of postwar costs of living could
Ill afford to take from the necessities
of their families the sums so exacted.
While the city of New York was thus
being plundered OF its right to tax per-
sonal property and the machinery and
equipment in manufacturing establish
ments within its limit the Legislature
by further> measures reached out and