LAND TAXES.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 585, 13 August 1909, Page 5

LAND TAXES.

DUTY ON UNDEYELOPMENT CARRIED. .' — i "UNCOTTEN MINERALS." TAX ON ROYALTIES SUBSTITUTED. (liy Telegraph.—Press Association,—OoDjricbt.l London, August 11. In the course of tho debate in the House of Commons on tho land tax clauses of tho Finance Bill, the Opposition speakers emphasised tho Government's refusal to fulfil its promise to respect existing contracts, inasmuch as it defeated an amendment which proposed to levy tho duty on undeveloped land (id. in the £ on site value) only after sale, lcaso, or transfer. Mr. Balfour, Leader of the Opposition, urged that if a landowner refused a firm offer from a responsible buyer, there would be a solid basis to go upon, but' it would be a basis for rating him upon the annual value of the sum refused, not for singling him out as a subject for an anomalous tax on capital. Tho ex-Premier added, vehemently:— "This is not a tax for getting money, but votes,'because it is believed that the tax will affect only the few, leaving the many untouched." He added: "The Government is dealing tho greatest blow ever aimed at our national traditions of finance." The Prime Minister (Mr. Asquith), in reemphasised the growth of the towns, and tho increasing demand for building sites. The clause dealing with the dnty on undeveloped land was carried; the voting being: For the clause ... ... ... 223 Against the clause ... 119 Government majority ... 104 LAND VALUATION. ■AT STATE COST, WITH OWNER'S - . ,-v . OPTION. London, August 11. ' With regaird to thc ; proposed separat'o valuation of land and buildings under the Finance Bill, the Government has given notioe of an amendment providing that the, valuation shall be at the expense of the State, with'option-to the owner to'make a valuation. .'. RESOLUTION PASSED., (Roc. August 12, 11.15 p.m.) 'London, August 12. In the Houso of Coniinons the financial resolution authorising the paying-out of public money to meet the expenses -of valuing land or premises for the new land duties was carried by 121 votes, the voting being 217 to 96. : : [The original valuation clauses of the Finan'co Bui sought to throw the onus of valuing on the owner, so the neiv-proposal is an impbrtant departure. The original clauses' provided, that as soon > as : possible after the passing- of the' Act, all owners of land'would bo.required to mako a Separate return, of tho total .value and site'.valtie, of each'piece of land under separate occupation, and a separate return of the value of all minerals;, a'similar valuation of undeveloped land and minerals was. to ;he repeated every'fifth yfar. 1 As. to'the cost of making'the total valua> tion, Mr. Asquith estimates it at ; tw6 millions,'Mr. Balfour nt ' > MINING RENTS. A GOVERNMENT^AMENDMENT. London, August 11. : In connection with Clause 12 of the'Fi-' ■nanco Bill (levying a mineral rights duty of :3d; in the £ on the capital value of minerals, iknowp as r the, ungotten minerals duty), ; tho (Government,: has given notice |.gf an 1 jant'amendment. |,' Under this amendniont the duty will fillnot on the'capital value of ungotten minerals jbut on mining rents, including royalties. It will be an annual duty of 5 per cent, MR. A. CHAMBERLAIN ON CHANCE OF ''FRONT. - . MR. ASQUITH'S ESTIMATES. : (Roo, August 12; 11.15 p.m.) ; . : > London, August 12. ■ Speaking on the Finance Bill in the House of Commoftts, the Prime Minister, Mr. Asquith,estimated that, the cost of the State :valufttion of land in connection with tho new : duties would be two. millions.; He estimated 'that 500 officials would bo employed, and that the valuation would be Completed in 'four years, the cost for the first' year, being £300,000, ■■ . i The yield from the reversion duty on leaseholds (oue-tenth on tho value of the benefit accruing to the lessor on. determination of loase) and from the duty on undeveloped land (id.- in the £ on the site value) was estimated in tho first year to be £325,000. The new tax (in place of ungotten* minerals duty) providing an annuah duty of, 5 por cent, on minoral rents, including royalties and - head rents, was expected! to yield £350,000. i . Mr. Austen Chamberlain, formerly Unionist Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a vigorous speech emphasised the, Government's remarkable change of front, and tardy " recognition that the case against tho former unworkable; proposals oould not be met. The Government had been compelled 'to recast the Budget and to make.a new Budget speech in August. Mr. Chamberlain added , that the complaint made from the outset by the Opposition of the, injustice of. requiring landowners to pay for the valuation had been justified, but the new; plan, which was an admission of defeat, would not : allay opposition to the Budget. -. OWNERS' ATTITUDE: A LESSER EVIL. A deputation from a mining association, headed by Mr. Eatcliffe Ellis, waited on the Chancellor of the Exchequer in June, when the question of replacing the duty on the capital value of ungotten minerals by a duty on mineroyalties, was discussed. Mr. Lloyd-George said: The suggestion, as far as I can gather, is that I should take the contribution not in the form of. a tax upon Ungotten, minerals, or even the capitalised value of mineral rights, but- on the rqnts or royalties which the owner aotually receiveß. Mr. Eatcliffe Ellis: We have no authority to suggest that you should' put a tax on royaltyowners. . : . We suggest that minerals should not bo further taxed. They are taxed now on income. , _ Mr. Lloyd-George: But if you do tax the Jandowuer at all in respect of minerals you think it better it should be in the form of a tax on what he actually .receives, and not on what is a purely speculative estimate of the value? Mr. Rotcliffo'Ellis: Wo do, not wish'any tax at all, but if you want to tax what tlie landowner gets out of minerals that is the only way to do it, '