Evening star., 1932-02-07

the inclusion, for purposes Of COM
parison, of Government tax-exempt
property in computing Washington's
total assessment and Of the Govern
ment's lump-sum contribution in COM
putting the total tax levy.
The Mapes Committee casts aside
such inclusions as being beyond the
pale.
On this point the Bureau of Eff
cheney speaks as follows: g. It
is manifestly unfair to compare tax
rates and tax revenues in Wash
ingten with those of other cities with
out taking into consideration the
large property holdings of the Fed
eral Government, which are exempt
from taxation. To establish comparable
tax data for Washington 1t is necessary
to determine and include the amount
the Federal Government would pay in
taxes to the District of Columbia on
its property holdings used for the trans
actions of the Nations business If it
were subject to tax. Therefore, two
computations of adjusted assessed valu-
ations were made, the first on the basis
of Washington'S assessed valuation per
capita exclusive of all Federal prop
erty holdings, and the second on the
basis of Washington's assessed valua-
ton per capita, including the property
holdings of the Federal Government
other than park property and property
used for the exclusive benefit of the
District government"
The Mapes Committee said: 1.-THE
committee cannot agree with the con-
tention that the Federal real estate or
property should be used in the COM
parison of relative tax burdens. The
buildings owned by the Federal Govern
ment would be practically useless to
any one but the Government. They
have practically no market value. The
only value they have, except for Gov
erment purposes, Is scrap value. They
were not erected by any one engaged
in business for profit and cannot be
considered il the same class for struc-
lures for orGtnary business enterprise.
Under such conditions it is decidedly
unsound to ISe the cost or reproduce
tion value OF these buildings in any
comparison Of relative assessed values
or tax burt ems. Furthermore, much
of the land value upon which these
Government buildings stand was created
by the Federal Government, and due
consideration certainly should be given
to this fact by Congress"
The Bureaus Method.
In its 1880 report, the Bureau of Eff
ficiency computed the tax liability Of
the Federal Government as a municipa!
taxpayer in connection with the ordi-
nary costs Of government of the mu-
nicipality at $8865, 722, holding that it
would be "manifestly unfair" to COM
pare tax rates and tax revenues in
Washington with those in other cities
without taking into consideration the
large property holdings of the Federal
Government which are exempt from
taxation.
One of the most interesting features
OF this 1890 report, however. was the
bureaus method and conclusions relat-
ing to determination of "the Federal
Governments liability on account of the
loss of revenue and on account of ex-
traordinary expenditures occasioned by
the fact that Washington is the Ma
tional Capital" The two items to be
considered in this connection, the re-
port declared. were % the loss of rev.
enue on account of excess ordinary real
property exemption, and C2) the cost of
excess park acquisition and mainte-
nance.
Assessing" Tax-free Property.
The bureau found that valuations of
exempt properties in other cities are
only approximately correct" because
assessors do not, as rule. value such
tax-exempt property as carefully as
they would value taxable property The
bureau therefore, sought to compare
ratios Of exempt taxable property in the
various cities in order to determine
WaShingtons excess of ordinary eX-
emptions and the amount of such ex-
cess. The bureau found that Wash
1ngton has higher ratio of exempt to
real property than any other city COM
pared. the valuation of all its exempt
property being more than one-half the
total assessed valuation Of taxable real
property. 1t subtracted from this total
the valuation of real property holdings
OF the United States used for the trans
action of Federal business, and obtained
figure which it called ordinary real
property exemptions" Washington S
ratio of exempt to taxable real prop
erty comparable to that of other cities
was computed to be 1874 per cent,
while the average ratio of exempt to
taxable real property in the other cities
was 1875 per cent. The difference. 239
per cent, represented Washington's ex-
cess over the other cities, and applying
this percentage to the total assessed
valuation of taxable real property the
bureau obtained a figure. S34 ,388375,
which represented the value of Wash
ington's excess ordinary real property
exemption in 1928.
Loss Of Tax Revenue.
BY adding the value of certain ac-
quisitions by the United States since
1928 Of tax-exempt properties this fig
Ure was raised to S45, 1000 900 in round
numbers to represent the valuation of
WaShington's excess ordinary real
property exemptions for 1882. The bu-
reau then computed that the loss of
tax revenue on this account would
amount to $773,581.
The bureau concluded that the "ex-
traordinary expenditures occasioned by