Evening star., 1933-02-06
Local Surplus and the Taxpayer.

Local Surplus and the Taxpayer.
The Budget Bureau cut into the
estimates for 1884 submitted by the
District Commissioners to such an
extent that If these estimates were
enacted into law the District would have
q surplus in general revenues at the end
OF the fiscal year 1884 amounting to
about $3,3e6,O0O, according to the
testimony of Auditor Donovan before
the House Subcommittee on District
Appropriations.
The Budget Bureau practiced economy
with vengeance. But such economy
might be altogether warranted 1t
meant reduction in the taxes now
paid by the heavily burdened real estate
owner. Other cities are also pairing
their local budgets to bring about re-
duced local taxation. There is every
reason that the same thing should be
done here. The $3,366,00O estimated as
surplus at the end of the next fiscal
year, on the basis of Budget Bureau
estimates, is exclusive of the $1,600,0O0
already appropriated and expected to be
appropriated for emergency local relief.
The surplus would provide, or should
provide, enough money to be applied
toward a reduction in the high real
estate tax, the shrinkage of revenue
from which indicates the hard-pressed
condition of local taxpayers, and ought
to enable the Commissioners to set
aside money to be applied to additional
public relief.
If the House Committee now con-
sidering these estimates is fair to the
District taxpayer it will seek to use this
estimated surplus for local real estate
tax reduction. And If surplus water
funds are not to be used for improve
ments, spreading opportunities for local
employment this surplus should like
wise be used to reduce water taxes.
Yet, these are not the only surpluses
Of local revenues anticipated. Under
the Budget Bureau estimates there is a
proposed expenditure of S2,32l,3 for
street construction and repair, a large
increase over current expenditures. Even
with this large expenditure there would
remain an estimated surplus in gas tax
revenues of 100000
In view of this latter estimated
surplus, and the surplus in the general
fund, the bill reported from the Senate
District Committee Saturday for an
increase in the gasoline tax is all the
more illogical. The gas-tax increase
would place an additional million-dollar
burden on the shoulders of local auto
mobile owners. And, although the
Budget Bureau showed how the general
revenues could be trimmed to yield a
surplus of more than three millions in
1894, this additional yield from the
gasoline tax is proposed to relieve the
general fund of certain expenditures
which it heretofore has borne.
This proposed relief Of the general
taxpayer, at the expense Of the auto
mobile owner, would be made by put
ting all park roads repair and i'm
provement. all bridge maintenance, re-
pair and even bridge construction, all
salaries of street and bridge divisions
of the highway department, all salaries
Of the traffic directors office, all SAL
aries of policemen assigned to the Traf-
fic Bureau and all salaries of crossing
policemen-heretofore borne by the
street car companies-on the gasoline
tax funds. Under this proposal the
iniquitous tendency to overburden
q productive and easily-collected tax
until it begins to stagger under the
load, placing an inequitable and un-
justified proportion of cost on a spe-
cial class of taxpayers, Is manifested.
And in Washington the proposed in
crease is extraordinarily inequitable
because it relieves the Federal Gov
eminent, which planned and laid out
the streets, parks and bridges and is q
generous user of them all, of justified
share of the expense. The Federal
Government pays no gasoline tax.
But if the increased gasoline tax
would serve to relieve the general tax
payer of part of his burden by re-
ducing general property taxes, such 9
transfer Of burdens would in a sense
be justified. The real estate taxpayer
is in need of relief, even if it must comt
from automobile owners. The danger
that confronts Washington taxpayers
now is that they will receive no relief
by local economies and resultant sur
pluses of tax money, but that these
surplus revenues will be put forward a:
sn excuse for reducing the Federal con.
tribution as has been done before. Tht
local taxpayer depends upon the fair.
ness of the House Committee to prevent
this danger.