Evening star., 1940-01-28
Decrease in Lund
Taxes Reported
By Frederic J. Haskin.

ally, 1t Is probable that the retail sales
tax strikes greater number of people,
but that is, as rule, an invisible tax,
while gasoline stations post their fuel
price and the tax separately 80 that
every purchaser knows what he is paying.
So, as this particular tax is so thor
oughly publicized, it is especially inter-
esting to note that one State in the I'm
ion has answered the earnest prayer Of
the populace for relief California may
have fallen short of granting to its peo-
pie an immediate ham-and- eggs allow
ance but it stands out as the one State
which has lowered its gasoline tax. Ac-
cording to study made by the Federal
Bureau Of the Census, every other State
has increased gasoline taxes since 1882.
In sharp contract California has de-
creased hers by no less than 1S per cent.
For the Nation as whole there has
been since 1882 an increase of 500 per
cent in gasoline taxes. This figure refers
only to taxes imposed by the States which
are in addition to the basic Federal tax.
While Florida leads with an increase of
1863 per cent, four other States have
raised their rates more than 100 per cent:
Iowa, 1888 per cent; Michigan, 1913 per
cent; New Jersey, 1897 per cent, and
North Carolina, 1895 per cent.
Twenty-Five States have increased
their rates by more than so per cent and
33 States by more than IS per cent. In
only four States has the increase been
less than 10 per cent. These are Maine,
Illinois, Nebraska and Maryland Him
ois shows the least increase, only 20 per
cent.
The first State impost on motor fuel
was adopted in Oregon in February, 1919.
This was tax of l cent per gallon on
gasoline for the maintenance Of high
ways. BY April of the same year three
additional States-Colorado New Mexico
and North Dakota-had followed suit.
In three years IS States had adopted
gasoline taxes and within the short space
of 10 years every State in the Union and
the District of Columbia had done like
wise. New York, in 1929, was the last to
adopt this method of raising revenue.
When gasoline taxes first were i'm
posed, there was a sort of covenant-in
some cases explicit, in others tacit-that
the revenues accruing should be used
solely for the building and maintenance
OF highways. Long ago, in most juris-
dictions, that covenant went by the
board, and today large proportion of
the entire State budgets is realized from
the tax on motor fuel. With more than
25,00000O motor vehicles in nearly con-
stant operation and with gasoline used
for all manner of stationary engines, the
consumption is enormous and the temp
tation to tax this necessity has been too
much for the legislators.
The Bureau of the Census has en-
ployed the year 1882 from which to mark
the rise in these tax rates, presumably
because 1888 marked the beginning of
the New Deal and the wholesale distri-
button of funds for relief. Not only the
Federal Government but State and local
governments were obliged to find some
means of raising revenue to meet the
cost of direct relief and the many prof.
ects from the employment of the people
which were launched. The gasoline tax
seemed the most direct and easiest to
collect.
The apparent ease with which these
added taxes are collected may be seen
by comparing the actual price of gasoline
and the price after taxes have been
added. For example, prices of gasoline
in the United States averaged 1883
cents per gallon in service stations of so
representative cities on January /, 1910,
as against 1851 cents per gallon on
December l, 1889, and 1929 cents per gall
Ion on January l. 1899. The consumer,
however, was forced by taxes averaging
5.42 cents per gallon to pay an average
of 1895 cents per gallon. as compared
with 1898 cents on December /, 1899. and
1875 cents on January l, 1899.
\
There is another side to the tax pic
ture which may come to some people as
surprise. There has been a rather gen.
eral opinion that the tax trend is always
upward and this is the rule, so it is al
most shock to learn that there have
been extensive reductions in taxes in
some directions. Since 1882 there have
been reductions in general and selective
property taxes in just half the States of
the Union. This reduction has been so
remarkable that, even counterbalanced
by the increases in other States, the
country as whole shows a 1876 per cent
decrease
These taxes include primarily the land
tax, but also inheritance, gift and estate
taxes. Where as in 1882 taxes of this
character represented Sc per cent of
total State revenues, the latest figure
shows them as representing only 2.8 per
cent. One answer to this is that much
Of the burden has been pushed over
from the land which stays still-except
perhaps in the dust bowl-to the motorist
who whizzes by.
While the State of Delaware leads in
its reduction of this type of tax, the
property tax, having cut its rates by 845
per cent or nearly all, there have been
fantastic increases on the other side.
Florida, for instance, has increased her
property taxes by $50 per cent since 1892,
New Mexico by $50 per cent and North
Carolina by the dizzy percentage of
825.9.
Seeing half of the States actually de-
crease their land taxes in period when
all other taxes are rising might prompt
one to muse over the theory of Henry
George, whose single tax was tax on
land-a tax which, he thought, would
rnnOvo the necessity for opu ofhar hind