Evening star., 1932-02-02
Comparison of Tex Burdens.

ODm pa TISUH tl LIZA pHA uChe'
A cmtrt ttst Wa hiHgton i
und-rtaxed be,au.c its ts% rate is Cnl2
ST. per thousand. IS compared with S l
Franciscc's rate Of 5000. or Miwsa.
KEGS rate of s3293. or St. Louis ratt
Of s27 10. has a coTvn~ing ring to it
ss Washington. to its Gi-adVantege. ha'
on more than one Coc2s sion learned
The Stttomcnt can. o, course. be cor
rected and clarified. bu' tn" ori2in2
citation creates an impression thCt is
not eesilv removed.
Intelligent n en-. Of course. realize the
sbaurditv OF attempting to So up a
Comp9 risen of tex burdens by a mer-
ccmparison Of tax rates, as taT rates
slone mean nothing without Enowin7
the sale of assessing tie property tc
which they apply. So one method oi
weighing relative tax burdens is to fl1c
standard that will enable a c-mp8ri-
son Of the actual amounts of tax le lee
on an actual. real vam" o. $1,000. Thi'
Is dono by attempting to raise all -eSS-
mems to f-ure ropre7"n irg 100 p0'
cent valuation
But here ert2r7 the oiiiCultv Of de-
terminin2 what are the actual scales ot
assessment. The Mapas C2rmittee
finds that the ratio of assessed to full
value in san Franciscc. for instance, IS
so per cent which means that While is
tax rate is 5000 thou-and dollars OF
value. il assesses on basis OF only sc
per crnt of real value, thus making its
adjusted" or actual tax rate exactly
ono-haN, or 5000. But the Detroit
Bureau of Municipal Research. which
specializes in such data. finds that Sar
Frsnciscos ratio Of assessed to ful
value is cnly 80 per cent, and the De-
troit bureau concludes that San Fran
cL7co's "sdjus ed" tax rate is only sl5.35
The Mapes Committee finds that Mil
~sukee's ratio OF assessed value to full
value is 80 per cent. and adjusts its
tax rate at S26.34. The Detroit bureau
fnds that MilWaukeeS ratio is 73 per
cent. and adjusts its tax rate at S24O3
Tee Mspes Committee finds that St
Louis assesses property at the rate OF
sS per cent. and so Goes the Detroit
bureau. and on this basis the experts
sdiuSt st. Louis rate at Sl76l and
sl762. respectively.
What is the actual ratio, and. there
fore. the actual tax rate Of these cities:
Is the Napes Committee correct in stat
ing that Seattle assesses property at 81
per cent or is the Detroit bureau cor
rect in maintaining that Seattle as
sesses property at 30 per cent? Is the
kapeS Committee right in setting Cle"e-
lands ratio at IS per cent CT is the
Detroit bureau right in putting it at 30
Der cent? Is not such a method rather
faulty when it results in such differ
ence Of opinion among the experts
themselves?
It is possible to work out interesting
results by this method. One may select
list of cities. for instance. whose aver
age adjusted tax rate will be almost
twice the average adjusted tax rate OF
another group of cities, and the total
and average population of the two
groups Of cities will be almost the same.
wat is the conclusion? Are the cities
z. low tax rate "unGertaXed," this Wcrd
Connoting a certain evasion OF taxes
or is the group Of cities "ove"taXed,
the word ccnnoting a burden under
which the citizens are staggering?
Which group should one select as most
nearly representing the desideratum in
tsxation-the high-rate group or the
loV-rate group? Should Kansas CITY
increase its adjusted" tax rate of
sl7.58 10 approximate Seattles "ad-
justed" tax rate Of s28.56, or should
Seattle cut It's tax rate to that of Kan
sss City?
The questions are merely rhetorical.
Neither Kansas City nor Seattle is
going to change its rate Of taxation to
eoualize the tax burden between them.
Each city is faced with conditions pecu-
liar to each. Both cities have different
points Of view regarding the scale Of
municipal living upon which they wish
to este bHSh themselves. To raise the
rate Of taxation in Kansas City TO
equal that Of Seattle might be as de-
structive as to cut the rate Of taxation
in Seattle to that Of Kansas City. The
significant point is that each city has
the right to determine its own burden OF
taxation its own scale Of living, whether
1t chooses to borrow money to invest in
various municipal enterprises or whether
it chooses to DO without borrowing
money and live on current income. And
each city has and exercises the right
to say whether it will raise municipal
revenue by low tax rate applied to
9 high assessment or by a high tax
rate applied to a low assessment.
Today's article in The Star series on
the history Of various attempts to show
that washington is unoertaxed de-
velops the argument of Washingtonians
who convinced the Joint Committee Of
Congress in 1915 that fair comparison
of city tax burdens is possible, and a
fair comparison showed WaShin8ton's
tax burden to be equitable and sum
cient. Many OF those arguments, tn
spite of changing conditions here and
elsewhere, apply with equal force and
logic TO resist the current charge, based
on arbitrary selection of figures, that
Washington is undertaxed.
TLn Maui .,Hrash Trnck !"