Evening star., 1936-04-09
The Parker Report.


One source of value in the Parker tax
report lies in the identity and reputation
Of its author, Lowell H. Parker, expert
tax consultant to the Revenue Commit
tees of House and Senate and the Joint
Congressional Committee on Internal
Revenue Taxation.
Mr. Parker enjoys the respect and con-
fidence OF members of Congress with
whom he has worked on both sides Of
the Capitol: That is helpful to Wash
ington. A report on tax matters from
almost any other authority would be sub
jected to criticism, as in the past, as
manufactured" evidence. That criticism
cannot stand in relation to Mr.. Parker's
report.
He has chosen for his comparable data
the carefully collected statistics OF the
Bureau of the Census, the only oficial
source of such figures. He has discarded
as unreliable the guess-work estimates OF
"adjusted" tax rates and made his COM
parisons with actual totals, expressed in
per capita terms, as the best method to
show the distribution of the tax burden.
While in general his methods are similar
to the fair tax comparisons made in the
past, which without exception have
shown Washington to be bearing its fair
burden of taxation, Mr.. Parker has in
troduced some new and interesting
factors of comparison.
He has shown, for instance, that the
tax burden varies not only with popula-
ton but with climate and location. He
has taken into consideration the density
of population, as well as total population,
showing that Washington, twenty-third
in density, ranks third in tax burden per
capita.
He has noted the comparison between
cities with large mixed population OF
colored and white citizens, showing
washington with the third highest per
capita tax burden per white inhabitant
in the country.
He has studied the influence Of bonded
debt on tax burden, showing that al
though Washington has no bonded in
debtedness, the tax burden here ranks
with the tax burden of heavily indebted
cities.
One of his significant showings is in
the increase in the tax burden, Washing
ton having suffered far greater in
crease in per capita tax burden in the
past eleven years than any other large
city in the United States.
And his comparison of assessed values
per capita, in which it is shown that
commercial Baltimore, greater in popu-
lation and fifty-nine per cent greater in
taxable area, is seven per cent less than
Washington in total assessment, refutes
conclusively the claim that Washington
is erassessed-assessed, according to
Mr.. Blanton, lin most cases at
about one-half of full value"
It should be enough to show that
Washington, where the taxpayers are
subjected to disabilities in taxable re-
sources peculiar to the Capital City alone,
bears a moderately heavy tax burden.
Mr.. Parker's fact-finding report shows
Washington to be among the group OF
most heavily taxed cities in the United
States.
His choice Of comparable cities is
eminently fair-far more liberal in this
respect than fairness demands. For 1t
should be sufficient to show that Wash.
ington's tax burden is high in compari-
son with cities which approximate it in
size and in environment. Mr.. Parker
has embraced in his comparison the
forty-four largest cities of the country.
representing every portion of the country
and every environment. And the result
is that Washington, fourteenth in popu-
' lation ranks third in total city and
county tax burden; ranks eighteenth in
total tax burden even when State taxes
are included.
Mr.. Parker makes comparisons with
and without the State tax included. The
showing is significant in both cases. But
the fair practice in comparisons between
Washington's tax burden and the tax
burdens of other cities is to eliminate
the State tax, as Washington enjoys none
of the benefits of State sovereignty
such as representation in Congress and
the electoral college and in the State
legislature a recognized status in the
Supreme Court and the financial benefits
which come from enjoyment OF land
grants, bounties, subsidies and so forth,
which the Nation has lavished upon the
States. Nor in comparing city tax
burdens is the State tax comparable
factor, for the taxes to be compared
should be paid by contributors substan-
TALLY in the same area, to be distributed
to bene1ciaries in the same area and
for the benefit of that area alone.
The Parker comparison, presented by
d recognized expert in taxation, demon
strates the falsity of charges that Wash
ington is undertaxed.
The comparison proves again that the
Capitals financial difficulties are due
TO no deficiency In tax payments by the
local citizens. but result from the arbi-