Evening star., 1935-01-01

/ nQLlOHut OUttyuLtOH OuSeu Oh
the citys large national tar pay
ments and the fact that great
State bounties are not shared
by the District.
Obliga alton Of District Taxpayers for
Capital Upbuilding.
The obligation upon the Capital
community to contribute to the main
tenance and upbuilding Of the Ma
tion's city is adequately met. 1t is
adequately taxed in both local and
national taxes and in view of It's
peculiar disabilities, it is heavily taxed.
ta) In national taxes. See facts and
figures already set forth.
(b) In municipal taxes.
In comparing Washington'S city
tax burden with those of other cities
the following considerations must be
taken into account to reach equi-
table conclusions:
ID In measuring the Capitals
municipal taxes compared with the
taxes of other American cities in
equity use as the measuring yard
, stick comparison Of actual tax levies
when cities Of WaShingt0n's appr0xi-
mate population and conditions are
concerned. and per capitas of such
levies when the comparison Is with
cities much larger or smaller than
Washington. (2) In equity consider
the higher standard and greater thor
oughness of District assessments. (3)
In equity the proportion of tax rates
and tax levies representing interest
and debt payments should, to prevent
misleading confusion, be eliminated
from all city tax rates and tax levies
in making comparisons. az In equity
States taxes should be eliminated from
city tax comparisons when the taxes
of other cities are compared with those
of Washington.
/. Statisticians are coming to agree
that attempts to measure comparative
tax burdens by combining tax rates
with the reported relations Of assessed
to true value bring results that are
misleading and worthless.
references:
Evening Star article on eval-
uated tax rates. December "a.
Book of statistical tabulations.
prepared by Citizens Joint Com
mittee on Fiscal Relations, 1882.
Remarks of L. A. Carruthers at
Oldest Inhabitants dinner, printed
in Star of December IL.
Argument of Edward r. COL
laday before Senate Subcommitt-
tee on District Appropriations.
first session, Seventy-secon Con-
gress, 1882.
Argument of Theodore w. Noyes
before Congressional Joint Com
mittee of 1915, Senate Document
247, first session. Sixty-fourth
Congress; before House District
Committee, December 1915, 1919;
before Senate Subcommittee on
District Appropriations, consider
ing District appropriations bill for
fiscal year 1921, April S, 1920)
Where cities ere close together in
population and surrounding condi-
tions, direct comparison of tax levies
gives informing results; and per capita
tax levy comparisons give reasonably
reliable results when the cities to be
compared differ greatly in population.
The High Standard and Greater Thor
oughness of District Assessments.
2. The second of these considera-
tions concerns the high standard and
greater thoroughness Of assessments
in the District of Columbia which, as
emphasized by the Census Bureau S
report of 1922, gives the District a
higher actual ratio of assessed to full
value than any of the States of the
United States. One reason why this
is true springs frem the commonly
acknowledged and recognized fact
that whereas In many OF the States
and cities the assessors are political
Office holders, usually elected, and are,
therefore, responsive to political pres
sure from their constituents, a pres
sure which tends to bring down the
assessments, the District assessor is an
official appointed by the Commission
ers and removable only for cause, the
Commissioners being the representa-
tives of the President and responsible
only to him and to Congress. All
of the pressure exerted upon him
by those to whom he is responsible
Is to make the assessments reach
a level that is as near the 100 per
cent required by law as 1t Is hu-
manly possible to bring it. Whereas,
in many cities other than Washington
and States other than the District,
the taxable area Is divided into a
number of assessment areas presided
over by as many different assessors,
who follow their own theories and
the dictates of individual conscience
regarding the rates at which they
shall assess property for taxation,
Washington is assessed by one assessor
and by assistants responsible to him
alone and who follow out the prin-
ciples that he lays down for their
own guidance.
Regardless of the theories as to why
Washington is highly and fully as
sessed, the facts speak for themselves.
Washington, with an excessive pro-
portion of its taxable real estate
placed on the free list" by reason of
occupation of such tax-exempt prop
erty by the Federal Government, or
by the embassies and legations of the
| nations of the world, or by the na-
tional churches or national headquar-
tiers of certain organizations, has a
, higher real estate assessment (statis-
ticians repOrt) than all Of larger, COM
mercial cities like st. Louis, or Balti-
more, or San Francisco, or Milwaukee
or Buffalo. Who in the world would
admit that II st. Louis, or Baltimore
or San Francisco, were assessed with
the thoroughness with which Washing.
ton is assessed, these larger, industrial
| cities, with their valuable real estate
| fanforios md cnr,n.aercial MA nfs Wnuld