Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-05-05

-@---~----~---
considering the steady increase In the
Districts tax burden since 1924. TO be
taken without O careful and exhaustive
study to determine anew the conditions
that exist today.
The last serious attempt to picture
the Districts tax burden In relation to
those of other cities was made the basis
of a special report on fiscal relations
between the District and the Federal
government by the Bureau Of Efficiency
last year at the request of the House.
The results of this survey sustained,
when analysed, the contentious of the
District for financial equity. While the
Districts tax rate is comparatively low,
its assessment standards are CORE
spondingly high. The House hearings
on the 1880 bill developed the fact
already known-that assessments here
are higher, in relation to the real value,
than those of almost any other city In
the United States. If there Is any city
with higher assessment standards, 1t has
not been mentioned. OF the Bureau of
Eficiency's fourteen comparable cities
studied in it's report not one has as
low a tax rate as washington and not
one as high per capita tax assessment
of real property.
The relatively low tax rate and the
relatively high assessment standards to-
gether give Washington a tax burden
that is adequate from every point of
view, and, in consideration of the pc
culiar disabilities under which the Dis
trict labors, its tax burden is much
harder to bear than that of the COM
parable American city.
Only q fraction of Washington is as
sessed and taxed. and this fraction is
decreased by every million dollars spent
by the Federal Government in acquiring
land for Its great new building projects.
Its tax exempt fraction contains the
plants of its greatest industry-the
Federal Government.
The assessment value of Washington
should, therefore. be relatively low
fact, as shown by the Bureau of Eff
cheney report, washington heads the
list among cities Of its own size; equals
or surpasses that Of many larger, richer
cities, The fraction of Washington's
taxable area exceeds in assessed value,
according to the Efficiency Bureaus
findings, the great industrial city OF ST.
Louis. It exceeds in value the taxables
of Newark and New Orleans combined
of Minneapolis, New Orleans and In
dianapolis combined.
Eliminating from consideration inter-
est payments on debts, representing the
expenditures in the past OF proceeds OF
loans which Washington has not en-
joyed, and State taxes, the benefits from
which washington does not receive, ana
excluding entirely from calculation the
United States as a taxpayer or property
holder, the Districts per capita tax
burden-all city and county taxes In
cluded-was shown to be $43.190 In
comparison with that Of Cleveland,
S4e.5s2; st. Louis, $s6.48S; Baltimore,
$3l.736; Boston, $7S.S10; Pittsburgh,
s54.s5s; Buffalo, $51.653; Milwaukee,
$49.s52; Newark, $48.2s4; Minneapolis,
s4o.5ss; New Orleans, $32.257; Cinein-
natl, $53162; Indianapolis, $40.021;
Rochester, $45.232; Jersey City. 44.ssl.
And including the United States as q
municipal taxpayer, paying $7,44o,73s a
year on an assessed valuation of $501,-
4s3,s75, the per capita tax burden of the
District, arrived at as above, amounts
to $55.ss3, exceeding that of every one
Of the fourteen cities except Boston. Its
per capita is 7s per cent higher than
that of Baltimore.
The per capita tax burden, already
large, should not be increased. The
lump sum payment, proportionately
small, should be increased in accordance
with the appropriations committees
recommendations.