Evening star., 1932-05-11
Soaking the Local Taxpayer.

SOAKING the Local taxpayer
Articles now appearing in The Star
discussing the effect of some of the
slashes made by the House in passing
the District appropriation bill, shortly
to be taken up by the Senate Subcom-
mittee on District Appropriations, point
out the actually harmful results antici-
pated by District officials in the tunc-
tioning of the various branches of the
local government. Granting that there
is always room for disagreement be-
tween sincere men as to the extent OF
the damage, facts are given by these
articles to emphasize sufficiently the
necessity for careful and painstaking
examination by the Senate of each item
eliminated or cut by the House, looking
into the merits of every reduction pro-
posed.
The effect of reductions in this de-
partment or that department is of far
less Importance to the average local tax
payer than the meaning of these slashes
when considered as a whole. The local
taxpayer has witnessed and is witness
ing the depletion of value Of his real
property, although the assessments and
the taxes on that property have not
diminished, the price of money bor-
rowed for financing has increased, and
the amount of his indebtedness re-
mains the same If the local taxpayer
Is a Federal employe, he has witnessed
and continues to witness incomplete
efforts toward Federal budget balancing
that have been centered for the most
part on reducing his salary in one form
or another, or even of withdrawing his
means of livelihood by destroying his
job. Ii the local taxpayer is in busi-
ness or commerce, he has felt the blow
not only of the Nationwide depression,
but Of the added and accentuated phase
Of local depression resulting from Fed
eral retrenchment schemes. The local
taxpayer of any community other than
Washington would not only favor the
cutting of the local budget, but would
be demanding it. For such retrench-
ment would mean reduction in his local
taxes, and as a politically potent tax
payer he would be able to take part in
determining the nature of the cuts that
could be made with the least amount
Of damage to his city.
Here in Washington the local tax
payer finds the shoe on the other foot
and it pincheS in more spots than one.
Reductions of the local budget carry
with them the expected curtailments
IN improvements and the necessary
functions Of his city government, such
as the schools. But these reductions
contain none of the balm that lies in
such reductions in other cities. The
reductions are being made, not to ease
the burden on his local taxation, but
to pass on to him the obligations as
sumed by and properly belonging to the
Federal Government. And the result
OF these reductions, cutting by third,
as they do, the Federal contribution
to his city, means higher local taxes
If not for the immediate present, then
for the immediate future. For needs
cut from the District budget are press
ing needs. To eliminate them now is
merely to shove them aside. They
must be met, If not this year, then
next
With this higher burden of local
taxation, from which his fellow citizens
in many other communities are freeing
themselves, he faces along with those
fellow citizens the prospect of dras-
tically increased Federal taxes. AS
District, local taxpayer, his taxes are
high in relation to the local taxes paid
in other municipalities not given over
to wild extravaganza or to excessive
expenditure AS a Federal taxpayer he
pays, in total taxes, more than any
one OF twenty-Seven of the States;
more, in total, than the aggregate
amount paid by eleven States. In per
capita payment of Federal taxes his
payment exceeds that of forty-four OF
the States, Alaska. Hawaii and the
Philippines. And in such relation viii
his Federal taxes be increased in the
Federal budget balancing revenue bill
now in process OF being shaped.
The average per capita amount paid
by all the citizens Of the United States
and the District Of Columbia toward
the Federal contribution to the District
represented in the $9,5OOOOO lump sum
amounts to 7 cents and 7 mills.
The reduction Of the Federal lump sum
by q third means practically nothing
In the way Of saving the Federal tax
payer. The full weight Of the load is
transferred to the people of the Dis
trict. A three-million- dollar burden,
borne by 132,0OO,OOO people, is trans
ferred TO ABS 1863 people. And to meet
this load these less than half mil
lion citizens are threatened with an
increased local tax. on top OF the as
sured increase in Federal tax, on top
of deprecated values Of local real
estate and on top of national business
depression and acute local business de-
preston
The proposed reduction in the lump
sum thus becomes a series OF heavy
blows at the local taxpayer and the
Senate. in the name of equity and fair
dealing, should prevent it.
- -S-@S%->-
Just Punishment.