offered objection to the mileage tax; they did not offer any objection to the gasoline tax and, subsequently, after the adjournment of the meeting, the Commissioners withdrew the mileage-tax proposal. The Capital Transit Co., when they offered no opposition to the gasoline tax did not have knowledge of that fact, of the fact that the other tax would be withdrawn. Mr. BATES. Fine. Thank you very much, Mr. Harrison. Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir. Mr. BATES. The reporter will insert at this point an extract from official transcript to public hearing before the District of Columbia Commissioners on the proposed increase in the gas tax, inspection fees, and so forth. (The information referred to above is as follows:) Mr. NEBERLE. My statement will be relatively brief, Mr. Commissioner. In the first place we appear here as one of the large users of gasoline; also one of the largest users of the highways. We have listened to Captain Whitehurst's statement as to this difficult problem. We have no issue whatever with his figures. It has always been a pleasure to work with the captain, and we have worked with him many times. The first part of the proposal before us is with respect to the increase in the gasoline tax. During the 12 months ended with September we used 8,000,000and-odd gallons of gasoline, slightly more than 8,000,000. Our use is increasing. Our use was at the low ebb in the 12-month period, along about March of this year. During the last 3 months-that is, July, August, and September-this increase has been at the rate of a million gallons per annum. Now, that increase will not indefinitely continue, but I would like for the use of gasoline to approximate 10,000,000 gallons, as manpower returns, unless our demand for ridings materially decrease. The first bracket would cause an increase in the tax cost of Capital Transit Co., on the present basis, of $80,000, and we can readily foresee $90,000 per annum. We live in the District of Columbia. We are relatively heavy taxpayers. Our taxes to the District of Columbia, of all kinds, amount to about $1,200,000 per annum. An increase of $80,000 is approximately 7 percent. We have respect for Captain Whitehurst. We know he has a very difficult job. We are not questioning and we offer no opposition to the increase in the gasoline tax, notwithstanding the fact that it does mean a substantial increase in our taxes. The second item, the increase in the inspection fees, seems to be well justified. and its effect is very small. We have no objection to it. With respect to the third proposal, as the captain has indicated earlier, we have had an informal conference with him, where I hope we ironed out the minor differences that existed in respect to the taxes per bus that we are now paying. Mr. BATES. Mr. Harrison, you get me the program that I requested as soon as you can. Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir. Mr. BATES. Because we will in all probability close these hearings tomorrow. Now the hearing will adjourn to 2 o'clock this afternoon, when we will hear other witnesses who may wish to be present in favor or in opposition to these various types of taxes. (Whereupon, at 12:15 p. m., the committee adjourned to meet at 2 p. m. the same afternoon.) AFTERNOON SESSION (The committee reconvened at 2 p. m., at the expiration of the recess.) Such large contributions to governmental revenue should entitle the contributors to a voice, not only in whether there is to be an additional tax, but also in the manner in which their tax dollars are spent, in my opinion. It goes without saying that taxicab drivers are unanimous in voicing a decisive "No," to any further increase in the gasoline tax rates, at this time. A 1-cent increase would add $300,000 per year to their cost of operation. These men are now working 10 to 12 hours per day to make a living. Many of them are ex-servicemen recently discharged from the armed forces. As an indication of the pressure under which drivers are already laboring, as a result of the slackened business and increased competition, 31 out of approximately 250 owner-drivers in the Yellow Cab fleet, failed to renew their PUC licenses at the March 31 deadline. This indicates that that many men, or more than 12 percent, and it is assumed that the percentage will hold true throughout the industry, have decided to seek some other occupation. It also may be seen as a precursor of what may occur as business drops off further during the slower summer months. Cab drivers, as a rule, are interested more than the average person, not only in the appearance of their city, but also in the condition of its streets and highways, and most of them can understand that it should cost more after the war than it did before to operate the Highway Department. Most of those with whom I have talked realize that this is true not only as a result of increased material and labor costs but also to catch up with work neglected or slighted during the war years. But they believe, and I agree, that the present condition of Washington's highways do not call for the excessive funds requested by the Highway Department apparently with the plan of "building Rome in a day," particularly in view of present inflationary costs, and also particularly in view of the prospective penalty to them at a time when their own incomes are decreasing. A cab driver, whether he rents his vehicle or owns it outright, is in business for himself and, therefore, may be classed as a businessman, although a small one. His rates are fixed by the Public Utilities Commission, and he cannot pass along a tax increase to someone else. He is already paying 2.6 cents more per gallon for gas that he did a year ago. He must bear it himself, and his only recourse, in an effort to break even, is to work longer hours, and longer hours mean possibly more traffic accidents. In conclusion, I sincerely believe that I can speak for every cab driver in Washington in voicing opposition to the proposed gasoline tax increase. Mr. BATES. Mr. Keeting, why does he pay today 2.3 cents more a gallon than he did a year ago? Mr. KEETING. It is 2.6; gas has gone up that much in a year. Mr. BATES. 2.6 in a year? Mr. KEETING. Yes, sir; that is the figure they give us. Mr. BATES. I thought there were two increases. Mr. KEETING. It was 1 cent just recently; was it not, Mr. Sorrell? offered objection to the mileage tax; they did not offer any objection to the gasoline tax and, subsequently, after the adjournment of the meeting, the Commissioners withdrew the mileage-tax proposal. The Capital Transit Co., when they offered no opposition to the gasoline tax did not have knowledge of that fact, of the fact that the other tax would be withdrawn. Mr. BATES. Fine. Thank you very much, Mr. Harrison. Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir. Mr. BATES. The reporter will insert at this point an extract from official transcript to public hearing before the District of Columbia Commissioners on the proposed increase in the gas tax, inspection fees, and so forth. (The information referred to above is as follows:) Mr. NEBERLE. My statement will be relatively brief, Mr. Commissioner. In the first place we appear here as one of the large users of gasoline; also one of the largest users of the highways. We have listened to Captain Whitehurst's statement as to this difficult problem. We have no issue whatever with his figures. It has always been a pleasure to work with the captain, and we have worked with him many times. The first part of the proposal before us is with respect to the increase in the gasoline tax. During the 12 months ended with September we used 8,000,000and-odd gallons of gasoline, slightly more than 8,000,000. Our use is increasing. Our use was at the low ebb in the 12-month period, along about March of this year. During the last 3 months-that is, July, August, and September-this increase has been at the rate of a million gallons per annum. Now, that increase will not indefinitely continue, but I would like for the use of gasoline to approximate 10,000,000 gallons, as manpower returns, unless our demand for ridings materially decrease. The first bracket would cause an increase in the tax cost of Capital Transit Co., on the present basis, of $80,000, and we can readily foresee $90,000 per annum. We live in the District of Columbia. We are relatively heavy taxpayers. Our taxes to the District of Columbia, of all kinds, amount to about $1,200,000 per annum. An increase of $80,000 is approximately 7 percent. We have respect for Captain Whitehurst. We know he has a very difficult job. We are not questioning and we offer no opposition to the increase in the gasoline tax, notwithstanding the fact that it does mean a substantial increase in our taxes. The second item, the increase in the inspection fees, seems to be well justified, and its effect is very small. We have no objection to it. With respect to the third proposal, as the captain has indicated earlier, we have had an informal conference with him, where I hope we ironed out the minor differences that existed in respect to the taxes per bus that we are now paying. Mr. BATES. Mr. Harrison, you get me the program that I requested as soon as you can. Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir. Mr. BATES. Because we will in all probability close these hearings tomorrow. Now the hearing will adjourn to 2 o'clock this afternoon, when we will hear other witnesses who may wish to be present in favor or in opposition to these various types of taxes. (Whereupon, at 12:15 p. m., the committee adjourned to meet at 2 p. m. the same afternoon.) AFTERNOON SESSION (The committee reconvened at 2 p. m., at the expiration of the recess.) Mr. BATES. The committee will come to order and we will proceed with witnesses with respect to views on the pending tax bills, for the purpose of raising additional revenue for the District. I have here, Mr. William Howard Payne, representing the District American Legion. Will you step forward, Mr. Payne? We will be very glad to hear your views. STATEMENT OF WILLIAM HOWARD PAYNE, VICE CHAIRMAN, LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, AMERICAN LEGION, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I come here as vice chairman of the legislative committee of the District of Columbia Department of the American Legion. There are today 57 posts of the American Legion in the District of Columbia with 25,000 members and 30 units of the American Legion Auxiliary with 3,000 members. I am advised that the American Legion is the largest fraternal organization in the District of Columbia and the largest veterans' organization. The District Department of the American Legion, at its annual convention in August of 1946, unanimously adopted a resolution voicing opposition to the proposed imposition of a general sales tax. If the committee please, I would like to offer a copy of that resolution for the record at this point. Mr. BATES. It will be included in the record at this point. (The copy of the resolution referred to is as follows:) RESOLUTION OF THE AMERICAN LEGION, DEPARTMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, IN RE PROPOSED DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SALES TAX Whereas prominent citizens and public officials, including Members of the Congress and of the administration, have publicly advocated the imposition of a sales tax within the District of Columbia to alleviate the revenue difficulties of the District government; and Whereas said proposals do not exclude the purchase of cost-of-living items and will have the effect of taxing corporations and individuals with large incomes at a rate no greater than people with fixed and limited incomes, including members of the armed services and veterans who are for the most part living upon the limited incomes earned by day-to-day labor, clerical positions, or veterans' educational allowances; and Whereas the present revenue difficulties of the District government are primarily attributable to the ever-increasing amount of tax-exempt Federal-Government property holdings in the District and the steadily diminishing percentage of District government revenue which is supplied by the Federal Government; and Whereas said proposals would cause a portion of the normal revenue of District businesses and individuals, including veterans who have commenced small businesses, to be diverted to surrounding States: Now therefore be it Resolved, (a) That the District of Columbia Department of the American Legion publicly announce its opposition to, and take necessary and proper steps to avoid, the imposition of a general sales tax within the District of Columbia; and (b) That the District of Columbia Department of the American Legion advocate that Congress alleviate the present revenue difficulties of the District government by either an increase in the portion of the District government revenue which is contributed by the Federal Government or by an increase in the District of Columbia income-tax rates. (NOTE.—Adopted unanimously by 1946 convention of the District of Columbia Department of the American Legion.) offered objection to the mileage tax; they did not offer any objection to the gasoline tax and, subsequently, after the adjournment of the meeting, the Commissioners withdrew the mileage-tax proposal. The Capital Transit Co., when they offered no opposition to the gasoline tax did not have knowledge of that fact, of the fact that the other tax would be withdrawn. Mr. BATES. Fine. Thank you very much, Mr. Harrison. Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir. Mr. BATES. The reporter will insert at this point an extract from official transcript to public hearing before the District of Columbia. Commissioners on the proposed increase in the gas tax, inspection fees, and so forth. (The information referred to above is as follows:) Mr. NEBERLE. My statement will be relatively brief, Mr. Commissioner. In the first place we appear here as one of the large users of gasoline; also one of the largest users of the highways. We have listened to Captain Whitehurst's statement as to this difficult problem. We have no issue whatever with his figures. It has always been a pleasure to work with the captain, and we have worked with him many times. The first part of the proposal before us is with respect to the increase in the gasoline tax. During the 12 months ended with September we used 8,000,000and-odd gallons of gasoline, slightly more than 8,000,000. Our use is increasing. Our use was at the low ebb in the 12-month period, along about March of this year. During the last 3 months-that is, July, August, and September-this increase has been at the rate of a million gallons per annum. Now, that increase will not indefinitely continue, but I would like for the use of gasoline to approximate 10,000,000 gallons, as manpower returns, unless our demand for ridings materially decrease. The first bracket would cause an increase in the tax cost of Capital Transit Co., on the present basis, of $80,000, and we can readily foresee $90,000 per annum. We live in the District of Columbia. We are relatively heavy taxpayers. Our taxes to the District of Columbia, of all kinds, amount to about $1,200,000 per annum. An increase of $80,000 is approximately 7 percent. We have respect for Captain Whitehurst. We know he has a very difficult job. We are not questioning and we offer no opposition to the increase in the gasoline tax, notwithstanding the fact that it does mean a substantial increase in our taxes. The second item, the increase in the inspection fees, seems to be well justified, and its effect is very small. We have no objection to it. With respect to the third proposal, as the captain has indicated earlier, we have had an informal conference with him, where I hope we ironed out the minor differences that existed in respect to the taxes per bus that we are now paying. Mr. BATES. Mr. Harrison, you get me the program that I requested as soon as you can. Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir. Mr. BATES. Because we will in all probability close these hearings tomorrow. Now the hearing will adjourn to 2 o'clock this afternoon, when we will hear other witnesses who may wish to be present in favor or in opposition to these various types of taxes. (Whereupon, at 12:15 p. m., the committee adjourned to meet at 2 p. m. the same afternoon.) AFTERNOON SESSION (The committee reconvened at 2 p. m., at the expiration of the recess.) |