This, we think, would be the first bill that would grant an outright exemption to property taxes to this type of organization. We think the flood gates will be opened for all other similar type organizations. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Back. How, in your judgment, does this organization differ from the mimeographed list that some one in the city government supplied to us? Mr. BACK. I think I have it in my briefcase, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Here are some of the organizations that have been granted tax-exempt status in various years, by Congress: The Army Distaff Foundation, American Association of University Women, American Historical Association, American Legion, AMVETS, Association for Childhood Education International, B'nai Brith, Henry Monskev Foundation, Columbia Historical Society, Corcoran Art Gallery, Eddis Home, Howard University, Jewish War Veterans U.S.A., Luther Statue Association, National Association of Colored Womens Clubs, National Council of Negro Women, National Education Association, National Guard Association, National Society of Colonial Dames, National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution, National Society of the Sons of the American Revolution, National Society of the U.S. Daughters of 1812, National Trust for Historic Preservation, National Womens Party, OAK Hill Cemetery, Society of the Cincinnati, Vestry of St. Marks Protestant Episcopal Parrish, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Young Men's Christian Association, Young Women's Christian Association, and Young Women's Christian Home. I take it that is a fairly complete list. Maybe we left some out. How does this organization, in your judgment, differ from some or all of those that I have just recited? Mr. BACK. I think they differ from some. I suppose the differentiation would be close in some other areas. It is a fraternal organization. The Knights of Columbus would be a similar type organization. The Elks, the Odd Fellows, and various other such type organizations. I suppose our primary concern would be. "When do we stop?" This is a beginning with respect to this particular type of organization. We understand this is a national headquarters that the exemption is being requested for. I believe they have a local headquarters across the street. I don't know how we could deny, if we exempt by a special act, the national headquarters. I am not familiar with what all the national headquarters does for the District of Columbia. But if it is a national headquarters, presumably its activities would be minimal here in comparison to the country as a whole. The CHAIRMAN. You mentioned the bill that Senator Stevenson had introduced and the companion measures pending in the House. Isn't there also a bill, at least I am informed there is, that has been reported out of Congressman Hungate's subcommittee which, I am informed, provides for an automatic Federal payment to the District in lieu of the amount of tax lost by reason of tax-exempt status for specified organizations? Mr. BACK. I haven't actually seen the language. Have you Mr. Wixon? Mr. WIXON. I haven't seen it, Mr. Chairman. But I am advised that a provision was added to a bill relating to an exemption to the Reserve Officers Association. I assume that it was recommended by Congressman Broyhill, because at the hearing he said he was going to add to the Reserve Officers bill such a provision which would provide for a payment to the District of Columbia of the amount involved in the exemption of the Reserve Officers Association of property here in the District. I believe I am correctly informed. Congressman's Hungate's name I don't recall. The CHAIRMAN. He is chairman of the subcommittee that perhaps heard that bill. We can check out the details of the bill, but I take it from what you have said, that it provides for a Federal payment for just that one organization—or is it across-the-board Federal payment? Mr. WIXON. I have not seen it, sir. So, I can't speak specifically to your question. The CHAIRMAN. All right. What would be your feeling if the revenue lost, not only by reason of the fact that the bill instantly before us, which amounts to $30,000, but with respect to the $2.280,000 mentioned in your prepared statement. If that were made up, $2,280,000, on page 2 of your statement, by a Federal payment would that ease the pain a bit? Mr. BACK. Yes, it certainly would ease the pain, Mr. Chairman. I think we might have two points we would like to make in that connection: (1) We would hope it would not affect the total Federal payment to the District of Columbia, which ought to stand on its own two feet, in our opinion. And that this payment would not affect that grand total, whatever it might be. (2) The other point would be, I suppose, one of equity as between types of organizations. Whether or not, if we took that approach, the basic law ought not to be relaxed so that all of these can be exempted instead of their having to come to Congress individually and some get through and some don't get through. The equity of the thing as between similar types of organizations would be, I think, of concern. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have anything you wish to add, sir? Mr. WIXON. I was going to suggest only that we do have now, in our 1942 General Exemption Law, provisions specifically concerning the right of organizations to an exemption from real property tax. An expansion of the group or groups here might be difficult, as was mentioned. Are the Elks entitled to an exemption when another organization similar in nature, and fraternal, for perhaps some other reason is not entitled to an exemption? That is why consistently over the years, we have sought to restrict exemptions to the General Exemption Law now in existence, on the grounds, aside from any other reason, that congress in its wisdom in 1942 had determined the organizations which would be entitled to an exemption from real property taxation. As a matter of fact, the act says that these organizations "and none other" shall receive such an exemption. Of course, I recognize that exemptions have been accorded to other organizations since. Mr. BACK. Mr. Chairman, we are aware that the library part of this establishment is already exempt. I believe, to the tune of about $15,000 a year on tax liability. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, gentlemen. We appreciate your presentation. We will now hear H.R. 8712, accounting procedure for the District of Columbia. We will have Mr. John W. Moore, Assistant General Counsel of the General Accounting Office, accompanied by Mr. Lester W. Garton and Mr. Paul Siefring. I now place in the record a copy of H.R. 8712. (A copy of the bill, H.R. 8712, follows:) 92D CONGRESS H. R. 8712 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES JUNE 22, 1971 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia AN ACT To amend the Act entitled "An Act to authorize any executive department or independent establishment of the Government, or any bureau or office thereof, to make appropriate accounting adjustment or reimbursement between the respective appropriations available to such departments and establishments, or any bureau or office thereof", approved June 29, 1966, so as to include within its coverage the government of the District of Columbia. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That the Act entitled "An Act to authorize any executive 4 department or independent establishment of the Government, 5 or any bureau or office thereof, to make appropriate ac 1 counting adjustment or reimbursement between the respective 2 appropriations available to such departments and establish3 ments, or any bureau or office thereof", approved June 29, 4 1966 (80 Stat. 221; 31 U.S.C. 628a), is amended by 5 striking out "Government" and inserting in lieu thereof 6 "Federal Government or the government of the District of 7 Columbia". Passed the House of Representatives June 21, 1971. Attest: Clerk. STATEMENT OF JOHN W. MOORE, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL; ACCOMPANIED BY LESTER W. GARTON AND PAUL SIEFRING, SUPERVISORY AUDITORS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE Mr. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Russ wasn't able to be here today. With me, immediately on my right is Mr. Paul Siefring and Mr. Lester Garton, who are supervisory auditors for the District of Columbia. They are representing our office. We appreciate the opportunity to appear before your subcommittee in connection with H.R. 8712. H.R. 8712 would extend the authority of all executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government under Public Law 89-473 to the municipal government of the District of Columbia to be used for initial financing, within the limitations applicable thereto, the procurement of materials and services or financing other costs, for which funds are likewise available in other appropriations of the District of Columbia. The costs would be adjusted to the benefiting appropriations during, or as of the close of, the fiscal year. Under existing law, appropriations are available to the District of Columbia only for the specific purposes for which they are made and no others and such appropriations are required to be designated on the relevant documents prior to the time that the expenditure check is drawn. It thus is necessary in some situations that the charges be split in an appropriate manner among two or more different appropriations prior to payment. It is not always feasible to make the necessary accounting distributions with accuracy at the time the expenditure checks are drawn. The distribution can be made without too much difficulty a short time later. The District Government already has authority for one department, office, or agency to place orders with any other department, Office, or agency of the District for materials, supplies, equipment, work, or services and to advance fund to, or to reimburse, the performing agency therefore on an actual cost basis. We believe that the authority proposed in H.R. 8712 could provide for more economical and efficient operations. It could facilitate the accounting and payrolling for common service types of activities such as supply inventories, technical services, and joint use of automatic data processing equipment. It could promote economies through permitting the establishment of joint service activities rather than having duplicate activities maintained by several offices in the District of Columbia. I would like to emphasize that H.R. 8712, will not permit the appropriations as finally adjusted to be charged or used for any purpose for which they are not otherwise available. It does not authorize the establishment of any new fund accounts nor the transfer of funds from one appropriation account to another. The bill merely provides an accounting expediency to account for the cost of common items or services until such time within the same fiscal year as the costs can be properly allocated to the appropriation actually benefited. Accordingly, we recommend favorable consideration of the bill. This concludes our statement, Mr. Chairman, and we will be glad to respond to questions you may have. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Moore, Do the other gentlemen with you have anything they wish to add to your prepared statement? Mr. GARTON. No; Mr. Chaiman. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, gentlemen. We appreciate it. Mr. William Robinson, Assistant Corporation Counsel, accompanied by Mr. Oreste Maltagliati and Mr. Joe Haley, Office of Budget and Executive Management. STATEMENT OF WILLIAM A. ROBINSON, ASSISTANT CORPORATION COUNSEL, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; ACCOMPANIED BY ORESTE F. MALTAGLIATI, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE; AND JOE HALEY, OFFICE OF BUDGET AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Robinson. Mr. ROBINSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We appreciate the opportunity afforded us to appear before this subcommittee to present the views of the Commissioner of the District of Columbia on H.R. 8712, as passed by the House of Representatives on June 21, 1971. H.R. 8712 amends the act of June 29, 1966 (Public Law 89-473) by striking out "Government" in section 1 and inserting in lieu thereof "Federal Government or the government of the District of Columbia." The effect of the amendment made by the bill is to extend the authority conferred by existing law upon executive departments and independent establishments of the Federal Government to departments and agencies of the District Government. Public Law 89-473, enables Federal agencies and departments, including any bureau or office thereof, subject to limitations applicable with respect to each appropriation concerned, to charge one appropriation, at any time during the fiscal year, for the benefit of any other appropriation available to the department or agency for the purpose of financing the procurement of materials or supplies, or to finance other costs for which funds |