Evening star., 1932-05-23
have to do with the extent of the ac-

have to do with the extent of the ac-
tual tax burden.
Minneapolis and Washington. close
together in population, are likewise
shown to be close together in land area.
while the area of New Orleans exceeds
the combined area of Washington and
Minneapolis, and exceeds either one of
them more than three times. But
study the fourth column for one Of the
most significant differences between
these cities. There it is shown that
Washington'S realty assessment, on
which taxes are levied, is more than
twice as great as the assessed valua-
tions CT these two cities combined. In
total property assessment it is more
than twice that of the two other cities
combined. In real estate tax levy Min
neapoliS exceeds Washington by about
a million dollars, but in total tax levy
Washington exceeds Minneapolis by
nearly S2,000,000. New Orleans. in both
levies, is far below either Washington
or Minneapolis.
The Debt Factor Shown.
One reason for the size of the total
tax levy in both Minneapolis and New
Orleans is found in column of the table.
The combined interest payments Of
these cities amounts to more than
their tax levieS are swelled to meet this
interest. and yet the total tax levy in
Washington is greater than either of
these two cities, including their inter-
est payments on Indebtedness, which
represents investment in public service
enterprises yielding return or outlayS
in public works being paid for with
borrowed money to be enjoyed while
sinking fund and interest payments are
spread over the years.
1t is contended by the Joint Citizens
Committee, however, that interest pay
ments do not constitute comparable
factor when the comparison is between
the tax burdens for current city main-
tenance, and when the interest pay
ments are logically deducted in this
comparison, it is found (Col. 81 how
great is the excess of total tax levy in
Washington over that for the two other
cities. When special assessments are
included as part Of the total tax levy
and special assessments, of course, rep
resent form of taxation and should
be included-Washingto tax total,
with interest payments for. the other
cities included, is in excess of that for
Minneapolis by nearly $4,000, 900 and for
New Orleans by more than $11 900, 900.
In the last column, all revenues, less
subventions, grants, donations, gifts and
assessments, are compared and WASH
considered in relation to the total for
Minneapolis ($28,018, ,628), and for New
Orleans ($23,015,51D.
Low Taxation the Desideratum.
One of the paradoxical elements in a
controversy that places Washington in
the position of proving its case that it Is
not undertaxed is the fact that high
taxation assumes some of the aspects
of generally sought desideratum-in
other words, Washington is subject to
criticism unless its tax burden can be
demonstrated as being among the high
est
Low municipal taxation, not high mu-
nicipal taxation, is the result generally
| sought throughout the Nation and the
low taxed city takes justiiable pride in
its status as such. This paradox works
to confuse the comparisons. It is to the
advantage of those who allege that
Washington Is undertaxed to select cities
that are highly taxed and then to
attempt to show-and by method that
can be attacked as to its accuracy as
well as on the grounds Of unfairness-
that Washington suffers" in the COM
parison in that its local taxes are not
as high as the highest.
On the other hand, to combat this
tendency it might be conceived as
justifable to select the lowest taxed
groups of cities and with them to com
pare Washington, In order to mass the
comparison favorable"
A favorable" showing for Washing
ton would be to picture washington as
groaning under q burden of taxation.
But the Citizens Joint Committee has
attempted to avoid the criticism of
handpicking cities. BY numerous COM
parsons Of numerous factors, 1t has
been willing to rest its case on the facts.