Evening star., 1935-04-14
Continued From First Page.)

and in assessment practices" which re-
quire some adjustment on tax rates on
the basis of the theoretical rate that
would exist If all property were uni
formly assessed at 100 per cent Of
its value.
To make the adjustment the Treas
ury experts used figures on adjusted
tax rates supplied by the Detroit Bu-
reau of Governmental Research, and
with such figures compared adjusted
tax rates in Is selected cities be-
tween 100000 and 1926, 900 population.
Four cities in this group were omitted
because of insufficient data.
The findings from this comparison
are that when debt service is in
cluded, Washington's tax rate Is the
lowest obtaining in any of the cities
compared, and when debt service
Is eliminated the tax rate in Wash
ington is lower than any city except
Cincinnati.
Cities Compared.
The cities compared are:
Jersey City, Boston, Newark, Min
neapolis, Louisville, Seattle. Milwaukee,
Baltimore, Kansas City, Portland, Buff
falo, San Francisco and Cincinnati.
The report shows that WashingtonS
property is assessed at 100 per cent of
true value and that it stands at the
per capita assessment.
Explains High Per Capita Here.
In connection with its table show
ing the very high per capita assess
ment, both actual and made on the
basis of the reported ratios Of as
sessed to full value in other cities
washington being higher in both
instance), the report points out that:
1T may be contended that this
high per capita property value is only
a reflection of an inadequate correc-
ton reported to the Detroit Bureau of
Governmental Research for the un-
duly low appraisal of property that is
common in other cities; and that the
comparatively high per capita prop
erty value in the District does not ex-
ist in fact.
"AS against this contention, GER
tain conditions found in the District,
while they offer no proof, are con-
sistent with relatively high per capita
property values. The residents of
Washington, for example, filed the
largest number of income tax returns
per capita in 1882 for cities of 100000
population or more. Likewise, Wash
ington ranks second Among the Is
cities included in the foregoing table
in the number of automobile regis
trations per capita. Between 1880 and
1888, as against an average decline of
approximately II per cent in automo-
bile registrations for all cities of
100000 population or more, Washing
ton experienced an increase Of ap-
proximately II per cent. 1t may also
be noted that the decline in the dol
lar volume of retail sales in the coun-
try at large between 1929 and 1893
was 49 per cent, as compared with a
decline of only % per cent for the
District"
District Stands Eighth.
In comparing the cost of govern
ment, the Treasury used IA cities and
showed that, with the Federal share
included Washington stood eighth on
the list, with per capita of s84.03 for
cost of government With the Federal
share excluded, the report placed
Washington thirteenth, with a per
capita cost of S6829.
Still other figures were given to
show what the comparison would be
on cost of government, If capital out
lays and expenditures for public serv-
ice enterprises in certain cities were
excluded from the calculation.
The Treasury also discussed briefly
the contention that the government
costs of other cities should be reduced
by the amounts of their contributions
to State government, before compar-
ing them with Washington. which
does not derive any benefits from State
government. Under this procedure,
the Treasury stated. Washington would
occupy sixth place on the list of IA
cities studied.
Discussing the comparisons, both of
tax rates and governmental cost pay
mentS, the report declares:
1T has been twice noted that COM