Evening star., 1939-06-18
Census
Continued From First Page.)

of Congress frequently indicate
that their opposition to larger
Federal payment is based on a
belief that Washingtonians enjoy a
relatively light tax burden.
And this belief springs primarily
from the acknowledged fact thai
Washington real estate and per-
sonal property rate is one OF the
lowest in the country.
This rate alone, of course, is nc
measurement of the tax burden
1t must be coupled with the
assessment before it means any
thing at all. While the State and
municipal laws relating to assess
ment elsewhere usually require as
sessment at 100 per cent of true
value, it is generally admitted that
there is marked variation among
the cities in the standards of as.
sessment actually followed.
How to Compare Taxes.
The suggestion is sometimes made
and in Washington it has been
made by the President-that fair
method of comparing tax burdens
would be to take the tax rates
apply to them the actual ratio OF
assessed to full value representing
the standards of assessment in
different cities, and by this methoc
adjust the tax rates to a COM
parable basis.
But this method has been shown
many times to be faulty and un-
reliable, chiefly because it depends
on gueSses and estimates and the
resulting adjustments of tax rate
represent nothing more than guesse,
and estimates.
Census Bureau Method.
Here is what C. E. Rightor. CHIEF
statistician, Division of States and
Cities of the Census Bureau. has
to say about the measurement OF
tax burdens by comparing tax
rates. Mr.. Rightor is familiar
with the tax rate comparison
method, because he made com
parsons of that sort for many years
for the former Detroit Bureau oi
Municipal Research as a method
of showing the trends in tax burden
in different cities Mr.. Rightor says
in report written for Senator
Overton this year concerning q
comparison of tax burdens:
Attempt was not made to in
dicate approximately the compare
tive burden of real property taxes
in the u cities. The relative
burden might be determined by
adjusting the tax rate to reflect
the ratio of assessed to true valua-
ton of property. This ratio varies
widely among the cities, but as
reliable data were not available tC
the bureau, they were not included
in the report. Several of the cities
report that assessments are at true
or full value, while other cities by
law or in practice assess at only a
fraction of full value. With a real
and tangible personal property rate
Of SIS per $1,000, however mote
the present rate is $3.50 per 81 ,OOO)
Washington would have a favorable
position in any rational computa
ton of adjusted tax rates.
Great caution, however, is nec-
essary in the use of the tax rate,
either actual or adjusted, as an
index of the total tax burden.
The tar rate. 1Uhile appearing
specifically to be simple and d.
rect measure, is really Dholl,
inadequate inder. The total tax rate
Is too seldom single rate applied
alike to all types of property-real
estate, personal, and mixed; il
usually is comprised of a rate which
varies for each class, being lower
for personal property, or at least
for Intangible personally, than fol
realty and tangible personally. In
some instances, as in Buffalo ano
other cities in New York, persona
property is exempt from the gen.
eral property tax; and in Pitts
burgh, under the graded tax law
the tax rate on improved real estate
for city purposes, is only one-hali
that on land. In some cases, as
was pointed out above, the valua.
ton used as base for the city tax
levy is different from that used
for the county or other local levies;
this complicates the problem ol
computing a single tax rate for the
city. In New Orleans, for example
the tax rate is assessed, for city
and school purposes on a valuation
that is only IS per cent of that used
in fixing the tax rate for State and
levee district purposes; and in
Baltimore there are several classes
OF realty each having a different
rate. The tar rate is only the re.
sultant of dividing the tar levy b,
the assessed Ddludtion; if, there.
fore, the valuation is made on some
basis other than full value, the rate
is affected thereby. In practice
the ratio of assessed valuation to
the true or full value of the prop
erty varies greatly from city to
city and is particularly pronounced
as between real and personal prop
erty. As 1t is impossible to obtain
accurate and reliable estimates o,
This ratio In the cities, euen TO,
realty, 1t means that the tar rate /.
an unreliable inder of the propert,
tar burden, and eUen more so fo7
the total tar burden.'"
Washington's High Assessment.
That disposes pretty we'll of the
comparison of tax burdens by tax
rates, adjusted or unadjusted. But
before leaving the subject, it should
be remembered that Washington s
tax rate is lo1D because its assess
ment is high.
Every comparison ever made OF
actual assessment figures shows
that Washington Is probably the