CLASS TAXATION.

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2795, 13 June 1916, Page 6

CLASS TAXATION.

Sir,—ln your issue of April 13, 1915, you were gctod enough to print a letter from me entitled "The Inevitable War Tax,' in which I pleaded that the war tax "which would be inevitable'', should be levied on all classes of tho community equitably, and deprecated the Govern ; raent making a class" tax. Mr. Harold Beauchamp, writing about this -time, also said it would be well to avoid anything in the shape of a class tax. I suggested a universal income tax, and pointed out that the country being under the curse of party politics, which ever party happened to be in power at tho time 'would most likely levy the tax principally on that portion of the community which would be. likely to show the , least resistance. Exactly what I predicted has taken place, and the Government passed practically a class tax, by putting the bulk of the war tax [ on the farming community. The following -table shows at a glance what the land-owner pays, in comparison with the amount paid under the income tax on incomes derived from money invested in securities or obtained from salaries, incomes, business, etc.:— Land and Income Tax Comparisons. In Terms of Finance Act, 1915. . Ordinary Landowner investor pays pays Income Lund taxes, ■ tax on, say, , including 5 per cent. Capital road rates, income on. value. at, say, Jd. capital value, 100,000 ' 2827 ' 567 75,000 1681 356 50,000' 827 189 40,000 . SCB 131 30,000 .355 80 25)000 249 53 20,000 183 32 15,000 125 15 10,000 74 S 5,000 ,32 - 3,000 18 — 2,000 11 — -1,000 4 - Prom the above you will see that the farmer pays from about five times as much to over twelve timos as much taxes on the same amount of money invested. In addition to this there is an income tax on all profits made by the farmer over.a certain amount. Now, why should one portion of the' community be singled out and penalised in this barefaced manner? Simply on account of party expediency. The farmers' vote is dominated by other classes, and party politicians have ,lo thvow justice to the winds and go for what is most expedient for the party. Tho farming community fondly hoped "when after yeaw of foil" they tit last put Sir. Massey in power, they would at least get justice done them. But no! Part.v expediency stepped in, and in order In consolidate his party in power, Mr. Massey put more taxes on the farmer, and took to his bosom Sir Joseph Ward, between wTiom and the land-owner, to put it mildly, there is no great affection. A cl£ar caso of save us from our friends. A. lot of piffle is talked about, the Wiir profits of the farmers, but the Government steps in and commandeers the meat at a low price; for instance; they give i\A: per lb. for lamb, and the latest ]

quotation in Sinithfield is 9Jd all qualfr tie's, and the bulk of. it goes into tb# bands of the Chicago-Smithfield meat ring.

Then the Government gets hysterical, Thinking there is going to be a shortage of wheat, implores the farmer to put in every acre of wheat he can, at the Bame time purchasing a. million bushels of wheat in Canada, thereby effectually preventing any extra profits being made by the farmer on wheat. A hundred, thousand bushels of this wheat was imported, when it was discovered the Test of the one million bushels was not want' ed, so it. had to be got rid of for what it would fetch. What the loss was to the country _is clouded in mystery. Then the shipping companies are allowed to exploit the farmers in freights, so that the charges on wool are now (in. eluding insurance, etc.) about 3d., instead of a penny. Railway freights have also risen 10 per -cent., which also tells hard on the farmer. It is notorious the way tho shipping companies have heen exploiting tho general public and the enormous profits they havo made. The London "Daily Mail" of February 5 stated that the net earnings of the shipping trade had ri6en from twenty-two millions in 1913 to two hundred and fifty millions in 1915, or over eleven hundred per cent., and tho shipping companies in this country, if what we hear is true, are not far behind in their war profits.. The following table shows the extra freight charged by tho shipping companies on wool, mutton, lamb, cheese and' butter, calculated on the total amount of each exported from New Zealand 'to the United Kingdom alone in 1914, the return for 1915 notbeing available:— Increase of freights in tho following Produce shipped to the United Kingdom alone. Amount shipped ' . , to United t Kingdom in 19H. . Inc. Total,. Wool— 195,612,29011) id. ,£611,288 Cheese— 859,956cwt 3-16 d. -£75,248.. Butter— 361,381cwt. 25,6 d. £45,i22 Heat—'" ; 3,149,624cwt. (As far, as I can ascer- ' ; tain the rise in freight on meat all round is about) 15-32 d. Ji229,61H) Total increase in freight on ihese exports alone, ,£961,638. Thus the shipping'companies have exploited the farmers on shipments to the United Kingdom, to the tune of nearly a million on the above four products alone. ■ What must the increase of freight amount to on all exports and imports combiner? 'fruly their war. profits must be colossal. In. the Ix)hdon "Daily Mail" of February 5, from which I have already quoted, it is suggested that the tax on excess shipping profits be raised to 80 per cent. I commend this to the Government'for thoir earnest consideration. It would be a consolation to the farmers (from whom such a large share of these huge profits are obtained), if they were utilised' for tho general good, and were jiot going to swell the pockets of one I section of the community alone. The farming class of New Zealand, as I know them, are as loyal and patriotic as any other class of the community, and are ready and willing to contribute every penny that -is required without a grumble, but they have a right to demand that the rest o£ the country should pay their fair sharo, and that the war tax should be an equitable one. -The farmer should wake up from his apathy and insist that justice should be done.— lam, etc., H. D. VAVASOUR. Ugbrooke, June 8.