224 MULTIPLE PURPOSE RIVER DEVELOPMENT 



excise taxes. These were employed as weights to determine the 

 distribution of the total change in taxes by income classes. If next 

 we observe what proportion of the total income within each class is 

 accounted for by each region, we can determine the regional inci- 

 dence of the tax change corresponding to our Model A.^^ This is 

 illustrated in Table 41. And, finally, to carry through with the 

 distinction between the incidence of the change in taxes and the 

 incidence of total power costs, we apply the data of Table 39 as 

 weights to the portion of the total power costs which annual 

 charges to customers did not meet. We observe from Table 38 

 that total power charges for the federal operation would approxi- 

 mate $1.5 million per year. We concluded that, in addition, a 

 certain amount of cost shifting was inherent in the fact that oppor- 

 tunity costs of funds raised by federal taxation would not be met. 

 This was on the order of $144,000. Moreover, we concluded that 

 there would be a shifting of the incidence of tax liabilities in the 

 amount of about $705,000 annually. In the case of federal develop- 

 ment, approximately $849,000 annually would not be recouped by 

 power charges. The incidence of costs can be seen in Table 42. 



From Table 42, we conclude that approximately 69 per cent of 

 the total costs would be borne by the Pacific Coast region, in which 

 the Willamette River hydroelectric site is situated. Approximately 

 31 per cent of the total costs, however, would fall on regions other 

 than the one in which the development is centered. 



In the case of the nonfederal public development, a somewhat 

 larger proportion of the total would be borne within the region 

 and a somewhat smaller proportion, correspondingly, by others 

 outside the region. Because of the doctrine of intergovernmental 

 tax immunity, however, a portion of the tax liability ($705,000 

 annually) would be shifted to the general public, as in the case of 

 federal development. This is shown in Table 43. Given this 

 alternative for the development of the reimbursable feature of the 

 Willamette site, we note that more than three-quarters of the total 

 of costs would be borne by the Pacific Coast region, whereas less 

 than a quarter would be carried by other regions. 



In the usual case of private development, we have noted that all 



" Census regions were arbitrarily chosen to illustrate the regional redistribu- 

 tive effects because of the more readily available data on this geographic break- 

 down. 



