Evening star., 1932-04-04
National and Local Taxation.

NATIONAL ana Local 1dXatlon.
Washington and the Nation have
witnessed the modern phenomenon of a
national tax-boosting revenue bill
speeded through the House and sent on
its way to the Senate by the force of an
aroused public opinion, one that de-
mands that higher taxes be levied
There is difference of opinion aplenty
over the form in which these new and
higher taxes shall be levied, but no diff
ference of opinion over the fact that
the money must be collected. The Fed
raj budget must be balanced and the
country knows it.
Yet this sentiment in favor of high
er Federal taxes makes itself felt at
time when widespread tax rebellion"
throughout large section of the coun-
try is receiving the attention of COM
mentators on public events, who see in
it one of the most significant trends of
recent times.
The paradox is explained by the fact
that the American taxpayer realizes the
necessity of Federal budget balancing
a process achieved through the levying
of higher taxes and the elimination of
all possible expenSe-but at the same
time has walked up with a jolt to the
enormity Of the tax burden incurred
for the support of his cities and his
States. He knows this latter tax burden
is too high. He knows It results in part
from extravaganza, waste, inefhciency
and. in some localities, from bald
thievery perpetrated by grating Office
holders. Conservative and radical are
bound by common impulse to revolt,
and the revolution is under way
The tax controversy in the District
of Columbia is over municipal, or local.
taxes The claim is advanced that the
District should be taxed as the other
claim is coupled with ingenious COM
parsons of tax burdens intended to
show that the District is undertaxed in
comparison with the citizens of other
municipalities. But these other tax
payers admit that they are overtaxed,
excessively taxed, and are making Wig
orous concerted efforts to reduce ex-
penditures and, correspondingly, to re-
duce taxation. Should the Districts
municipal taxes be pushed up, when
corresponding taxes in the cities and
the States are denounced as excessively
and intolerably high?
1t is only in respect to national taxes
that the necessity of heavily increased
taxation exists. In respect to these in
creased national taxes, if they are col
lected in the same proportion that in
ternal revenue was collected for the
fiscal year 1880, the District will pay
more than any one of 81 States, and its
per capita Federal tax will exceed that
Of all States except Delaware, New
York, New Jersey and Virginia.
Shall the District, on the assumption
that the Capital City is less heavily
taxed than many cities which have bur-
dened themselves with heavy bonded
@lioCbICOu4Coo lOA LlOLcy
expended or stolen, increase its own tax
burden to level set down arbitrarily
as representing that of the States and
cities which now are groaning under an
intolerable burden and are desperately
struggling to reduce it?
Shall the District, facing the certain
ty of greatly increased national taxes
be forced by its Legislature, which it
does not elect to increase, in addition,
its municipal tax burden, while the
cities which have imposed upon them
selves excessively heavy municipal or
State tax burdens are making con-
certed, and sometimes successful, ef-
forts to tighten such burdens?
Will not Congress in dealing with the
pending proposals to increase by millions
local taxation forget for the moment
that it is for most of the time the ma
tional legislature, increasing Of neces-
sity national taxes, and keep in mind
that in this particular legislation it is
the Districts municipal and State legis-
lature, bound in equity and by existing
conditions and precedents TO reduce the
municipal tax burden instead of in
creaSing it?