Evening star., 1932-05-26

This Is the fourth of a series of
articles discussing the tables sub
nlitted to the Senate Subconnni
on District Appropriations by the
| Citizens Joint Committee on Fiscal
Relations Bet,Deen the United States
and the District. These tables
shotDed Washinoton's relatively high
| tar burden among cities OF the
United States.
7 T Is contended for Washington tha
all State taxes should be excluded
equitably from the comparisons o
i city tax burdens; that Q) taxes Il
be equitably compared should b
| paid by contributors substantially In tn,
same area, to be distributed to benefi
Charles in the same area and for th'
benefit Of that area alone; that in tn
light of this principle the municipal "a,
and State tax are as wide apart as th'
poles, being separate and distinct II
personnel of contributors, in purpose o.
! creation, in scope and area Of distribu
ton; that (2) Washington does not "re'
ceive the same benefits" that accOmpan!
State citizenship, and should not there
fore bear the burdens which compensate
for these benefits.
Large cities dominate or include the
counties containing them; and in the
case Of these large cities 1t Is fair tc
consider county taxes as well as city
taxes Indeed, in substance they are
a part Of the city taxes. The tax
payers, the beneficiaries and the area
| for the collection and distribution OF
! taxes are practically the same.
The cities having over 100000 popu-
lation constitute so large a part OF the
hot fhn n q
county contributions and payments s:e
mainly city receipts and payments:
i and county taxes may In such cases
! De included in the comparison without
violating seriously the principle that
in comparing the WaShingtonian's tax
| burden with that of the taxpayer OF
another city 1t is fair only to compare
local taxes constituting a fund to which
only municipal taxpayers contribute.
and which is spent exclusively in the
city and for municipal purposes.
But the municipal tax tsometimes
including the county taxi and the State
tax are as wide apart rs the poles, con-
sidered in the light of this principle.
They are separate and distinct In per-
sonnel Of contributors, in purposes Of
creation, In scope and area Of distribu-
ton.
If the comparison, for instance. is
between Washington and Baltimore
there should equitably be compared
what Washingtonians pay for expendi-
ture in Washington and what Baltl-
moreans pay for expenditure in Balti-
more What Washingtonians pay for
expenditure in Washington cannot
equitably be compared with what Bal
timoreans pay for expenditures In Bal
timore plus what they pay as Mary
landers for the maintenance of SOW
ereign State and for expenditure in
that State.
One might as well inject into the
comparison of city burdens a consid-
Grafton of what the Baltimorean pays
in National taxes as an American Tor
expenditure on account OF the United
States including Baltimore.
In other words, the taxes that the
Baltimorean pays as a Marylanoer or
as an American have nothing to do
with the city calculations and comparl-
sons. In the different cases there are
not the same persons contributing, not
the same area within which expendi-
lures are made, and not the same
beneficiaries of these expenditures.
Baltimore taxes are paid by Balti-
mOreans only, and are spent in Balti-
more only. The Marylanders who are
in Baltimore contribute State taxes In
common with thousands outside OF
Baltimore, to be spent not in Balti-
more, but in all Maryland. Washing
ton has not the benefit Of outside con-
tributions to a State tax In the enjoy
ment of which 1t participates. 1t has
no State relations or privileges or
benefits.
No State Tax Since No State Benefits.
It has been contended that the
Washingtonian receives the same pen-
efits through his city government alone
that are enjoyed by the residents OF
other cities through their city. county
and State governm ents. and that the
Washingtonian's city tax should equal
the combined city, county and state
taxes of residents of other cities.
What are the benefits enjoyed by the
citizen of a State which constitute the
real consideration for the State taxes
which he pays? If he lives in large
CITY Of the State, Is 1t the driblet OF
State expenditures which the counties
permit to get through to the city? NO.
The state tax which he pays Is essen
tial to his status as citizen OF a State
and to his enjoyment as such cltlzen
of political and judicial rights OF IN,
estimable value and OF large financial
benefits.
loved by Washington?
State taxes are paid that one may
enjoy with thousands outside OF one
home city the privileges and Dement'S
of citizens of the State, including rep
resentation in Congress and the elec-
! toral college and in State legislature
| a recognized status in the United States
Supreme Court, and the financial bene-
Ats which come from enjoyment Of the
land grants, bounties and SO forth
which the Nation has lavished upon the
States. ~
These land grants amount to 1885,
524,723 acres Of the public domain
These money donations include nun
dreds Of millions.
The payment Of taxes as the citizen
Of a State gives the taxpayer his pro-
nortionate share in these financial
BENEFITS. The Washingtonian enjoys
no part In these grants. bounties and
BENEFITS as citizen of = State. Why
should he pay or have charged against
| him as mart Of his equitable tax bur-
den the taxes which are incidental tt
| the status Of State citizens and which
are one condition Of the enjoyment Of
these financial benefits?
The Washingtonian has none o.
these political or judicial rights Of
privileges. Why should his fair tai
burden be held to include what tn
state citizen pays in connection with
the actual enjoyment Of these fnesti:
mable rights, privileges and dement's!
Bears State Burdens, but Enjoys NJ
State Benefits.
| The proposition carries out the Ole
| idea that washington is to be viewed
as a State when burdens are imposed
and mot viewed rs q State when bene.
fits or privileges or rights are to be con-
ferred. The District has been pro-
nounced a State under treaty with
France, q construction conferring priv
ileges on aliens, but not State under
the Constitution, whose people can sue
either as State citizens or As aliens
| in the Federal courts. The District l.
a State when direct taxes are to b<
AakA ~rySA