Evening star., 1932-03-16

pavement. would contribute approx
mately $1,000 ,000-more than SO Der
| cent Of the estimate revenue from reg
1stration taxes on all classes of vehicles u
Principles Given as Basis.
After setting forth in detail its new
plan for the creation of highway
fund and the arguments in support OF
its modified form of motor vehicle
weight tax, the bureau advanced the
following principles as the foundation
for its recommendations:
81. The revenue from any special
taxes imposed upon motorists or motor
vehicles should be used only for the
special purposes for which the special
taxes are assessed and should not be
used for general municipal purposes
The revenue for general municipal
| purposes should be assessed and col
lected in the form of general taxes.
'2. The basis for special taxes on
motorists or motor vehicles should not
be so high that 1t is unduly burden
some.
49, The revenue from special taxes
on motorists or motor vehicles should
not exceed the amounts required for
| highway and related projects, with due
dA4OWd1lOC 1OA ACfCAdC 1IOIIl DEllCllCldl
assessments against abutting real prop
erty.
=. The total tax should be so ap-
portioned that those vehicles that
cause the heaviest construction costs
and the greatest damage to the high
ways shall pay the heavier taxes.
Il. The Bureau of Efficiency believes
that the registration fees and taxes rec
commended in this report meet these
requirements"
In his letter Of transmittal accompa-
nying the report Mr.. Brown, chief of
the Efficiency Bureau, explained how
the proposed highway fund would
operate as follows:
ITO this fund would be credited al
collections from motor vehicle opera
tors permit fees, motor fuel taxes
motor vehicles registration fees, motor
vehicle title fees and the real property
assessments made against abuttine
property for benefits incident to first
permanent paving. This plan would place
almost the entire burden of street con-
struction and maintenance upon motor
vehicle owners, and would relieve the
general taxpayers of the District of any
share of this obligation. The cost OF
constructing ana maintaining bridges
would be shared equally by the highway
fund and the general revenues. .,r
Cost Question Weighed.
The bureau has given careful con-
| sideration to the question of whether
| the cost of constructing and maintain
ing park roads, park bridges and park
| ways, or some part thereof, should be
added TO the items to be charged to the
proposed highway fund. 1t has reached
| the conclusion that, as between the
motor vehicle owners and the general
taxpaying public, the placing of this
additional burden on the motor vehicle
owners would be inequitable, that the
expenses of parks and parkways in the
| District of Columbia should be charge
against general revenues, and that
therefore, the general revenues Of the
District, supplemented by such amount
as the Federal Government may con-
| tribute toward the support of the Dis
| trict of Columbia government, should
| be charged with the cost of construc-
| ton and maintenance OF park roads
park bridges and parkways.
"a plan that would impose upon the
motor vehicle owners the cost of the
construction and maintenance of park
roads, park bridges and parkways would
| place the burden to large extent upon
trucks that are barred from the use
OF these facilities"
The report begins by recalling that
prior to the advent of the automobile
the construction OF highways was met
| from general taxation, the same as
schools, sanitation and other public
service projects. 1t states that since
| the advent Of the automobile the de-
mand for improved highways has grown
4 wear nv wear until the combined high
way programs of the State and Fedora
governments now amount to from one
to two billions Of dollars annually. Pre-
sumably in support OF its contention
that the personal property tax on motor
vehicles should be retained. along with
the higher gas tax and the new weight
tax on trucks. the bureau states:
The principle that the motoris
| should continue to be subject to al
forms of general taxation is commonly
recognized. No instance is known wher,
the motor vehicle owner has been re-
lieved of his income or real propert!
taxes on account of any special motol
vehicle taxes levied upon him. Th'
one exception which has been noted i
the personal property tax on motor We
hicles. A few Of the States have ex.
empted the motor vehicle owner from
a personal property tax on his motol
vehicle while continuing to tax al
other forms of personal property which
he possesses However, according Il
data furnished in the publication 'Spe.
cial Taxation for Motor Vehicles 1881
edition, published by the Motor Vehicle
Conference Committee, "a of the 4i
States continue TO tax motor vehicles
as personal property.
L.. ~