Evening star., 1930-12-17
Washington's Tax Burden.


tween Washington and fourteen Ameri-
can cities, the analysis concerning itself
chiefly with deduction from the bureau
figures of per capita State tax and debt
payments that are included in the rev.
enue demands Of cities other than
Washington.
There is ample justification for max
ing such deductions. Washington pays
no State tax and receives none of the
compenssting benefits therefrom; it has
no debt payments to make as it has
borrowed no money and received none
of the benefits for which cities else
where, wisely or foolishly have obli-
gated themselves. The basis of com-
Washington when it includes, in the
tax burdens of other cities, payments
for benefits of which the people here
either cannot avail themselves or have
not been permitted to avail themselves
Give Washington taxpayers the auton-
ony and permit them to share in the
bounties for which State levies become
In part the price, or in the benefits from
loans, requiring debt and interest pay
ments, and the inclusion of the two
items elsewhere would for purposes Of
comparison be logically proper.
The Bureau of Eficiency, of necessity
concerning itself with facts and leaving
to others the equitable consideration
and Interpretation of the facts does
include State taxes and interest and
debt payments. The results Of such
comparison speak for themselves. We
find that the general property per capita
tax levy for the fraction of washington
that pays taxes is higher than all of
rich st. Louis, nearby industrial BaIti-
more or New Orleans; it approximates
that Of Indianapolis and is not far
under that of Milwaukee. With the
United States participating as a
municipal taxpayer-as it should be con-
strued to participate in any such COM
parison-we find that Washington's
general property per capita tax levy
exceeds that Of ten Of the cities COM
pared-Cleveland, st. Louis, Baltimore
Buffalo, Milwaukee, Minneapolis. New
Orleans, Cincinnati, indianapolis and
Rochester. 1t is 81 per cent higher than
st. Louis, 56 per cent higher than Balti-
more
Deducting from the per capitas of the
other cities State and debt payments,
the general property per capita levy of
the taxable fraction Of Washington
exceeds that Of six of the fourteen cities
and approaches that of Cleveland and
Jersey City, while with the comparison
including Uncle Sans theoretical
municipal tax only one city, Boston,
shows higher per capita, with WASH
ington's being double that Of Baltimore
and exceeding the per capita Of the
next highest city-PittSbtrgh-by per
cent.
Broadening the comparison to al city
taxes other than State (includins county
taxes and deducttng the interest pay
Inents, the taxable fraction Of Washing
ton without the United States con-
trtbuting as municipal taxpayer and
bearing a part Of the burden elsewhere
borne by industrial corporations yields
Q higher per capita (s57265) than
nine Of the fourteen cities-Cleveland
1851 .Sss), st. Louis Cs43.4s3), Baltimore
$3S.695), Milwaukee tS52136), Mime
apolis (s44138). New Orleans $3.50. 3.364)
Indianapolis (s42O69). Rochester
(sS6.s4o) and Jersey City (s52.ss6).
Is not WaShington's tax burden high
when its per capitac-representing the
unrelieved by the taxes Of the single
great industry located here-exceeds
that Of Baltimore or New Orleans BY
nearly 10 per cent, and that of st
Louis by 80 per cent? With the United
States contributing as a municipal tax
payer, Wsshington's per capita IL
s72s30 more than double that of New
Orleans or Baltimore, exceeding tina
of Cleveland by more than 40 per cent
exceeding by substantial margins al
but one OF the fourteen cities compared
The selection Of the cities used IL
these comparisons is made on the basi
of population alone. The most impor
tsnt element, the progressiveness ant
the efficiency of the city governments
receives no consideration whatever.
Is obviously misleading to determin
what constitutes an adequate tax bur
den by comparing the per capitaS If al
e1acient and economically run city Wit
those of q city maintaining an un
wieldy and expensive governments
system that is heir TO all the Ills c
politics. The desideratpm, of course
is progress and efficiency and low cos
of government, not high per capita!
Another equitable consideration of tn
bureau comparison. therefore, involve
the selection OF progressive and we
governed cities for comparison Of Ia
burdens with eficiently governed Wash
ington. Since, when all the equitie
are considered Washington is found
be distinctly more heavily burdened /
municipal taxes than the cities, is M
the Nations city's tax burden heay
enough?
Feed the Game.
49, d, 4i,a ,,,.,s.,a1 drna.ol,A xr,l1fef ~