Evening star., 1925-01-29

current Appropriation act or contrib
Lifting a fixed, definite sum and to
allow the District to receive full
credit for miscellaneous lot of reve-
nue. which. up until the present fiscal
year, had been credited to the United
States and the District of Columbia
in the proportion that each had been
supporting these miscellaneous reye-
nue-producing agencies.
During the fiscal year 1924 the
Governments share of such revenues
amounted to SS5S,25476 For the pres-
ent fiscal year and for next year the
totals are not more or less problem
atcal- This class of revenue was an
precfably affected by the gasoline tax
law, which operates to reduce the in
come from motor vehicle tags, but
many of the other sources are of an
expansive character and ultimately.
II not Immediately, should produce
more than enough to offset this tenn
porary setback.
Leaves Decision to Congress.
Whether we should continue the
lump sum policy inaugurated in the
current appropriation act or go back
to the 6O-4o or some other proportion
ate percentage plan is for the Con-
gress to determine.
The following table portrays The
operation of both plans:
1. Total of divsible approximation. 1904
20 ,2o6' os; 1929 SGT OPS, ,os3 81; 1928, SOS
2. Federal Governments share 1894 .ss
0s2, ,49s.4S; 1928, t$s, SOC, 900: 1928, tss 500
B. What Federal Governments share vou,d
nave Deen or would be 6O-4O basis. 1908
$40. o.sll .233 .2s; 1928. si1. .593 Oss so 1870
,of' ,oat ercentAge os OF item of item /, 1924
1855 254. rs OF this amount will h. ra,r,s
ed. Deducting this sum. the percentare ~
Item Of item 1 would be 35 VI
fSsoo,ooO represents estimate ,moun+ a,
Governments share of miscellaneous rare,Na
which this year: and next year under tbe
terms Of the bill, will be credited wholly 'fe re
the District of Columbia. "
The contributions from the Eed-
eral treasury made and proposed for
1'-o ana 1926, respectively, work out
to be SO and "a per cent. resnaot1,
Taking into account the refunds 70
the Government from miscellaneous
revenue in 1924, the Governments
snare Tor that year actually was Ak
per cent and not 40 per cent. and +ba
80 per cent was approximately the
same proportion as the current fiscal
year and as proposed for 1926. If tbe
oo-4o mad been in effect for the fiscoI
year 1925 and were proposed for tbs
nscai year 1926, the United States. in
stead OF paying approximately so sno =
600 for each of those years wo,,Id -
required to contribute S1O,Sl1.23a %
for 1925 and s11, ,593, O9S so for 1aoe
These comparisons state the casa ~
the lump sum contrasted with tb.
fixed percentage
Contrast With Approprst,o
Under the lump sum pIan ~.
amount contributed by the ITnited
States-when contrasted with tho TO
tai amount appropriated-is readily
translated into a percentage figure
1nyersely, on a percentage basis ~
percentage contribution. is readiI,,
translated into definite sum. onca
the total of the appropriations for RI .
given year is arrived at If the lumn
sum contributed by the United States
is settled at a fixed amount for :.
period of years, that sum will renre-
sent a decreasing percentage of tho
total amount to be paid from the
Federal Treasury and an increasing
percentage to be paid from the Dis.
tricts revenues as the grand total of
the appropriations increases year by
year. So. too, IL the grand total
should decrease and the fixed sum
remained unchanged, the percentage
of the United States would increase
and that from District revenues
would decrease.
lump-sum plan ultimately will involve
a determination of what should con-
stitute a fair and just rate of tax
alton for the people of the District of
Columbia to pay for the benefits and
(Contipued an paca 4 CnInnp ~