REORGANISATION OF TAXATION

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 136, 5 December 1929, Page 8

REORGANISATION OF TAXATION

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—The following statement made by Mr. Nash at the opening of his campaign at Petone is open to question, viz.: "That they (Keform) had reorganised taxation so that the load previously carried by the wealthy section of the community had been transferred to the whole of the people by way of increased Customs duties."

Is not this an example of misuse of terms? The Customs revenue increased because more articles were coming into Aew Zealand. The Labour Party have always tried to confuse the public by using "increase in Customs duties" *or "increase in Customs revenue." As a matter of fact, the figures in the Year Book show that the total amount of taxation has been reduced from £22,000,000 in 1921 to £17,000,000 in 1028. Thia £5,000,000 relief in taxation has been shared by all: and for Mr. Nash to make the statement that added burdens have been placed upon the poorer section of the community by way of increased Customs duties is quite wrong. Since 1921 the Reform Administration has gradually and consistently reduced the duties on foodstuffs, clothing, and textiles and tobacco.

Without going into further details, reductions in Customs duty were made in I 1021 on tea, children's boots and shoes of British origin, paraffin wax, preserved fish, silk piece goods, and other items. It is true that certain increases were made, but this was done to protect New Zealand industries. I am. sure even the Labour Party would not object to these particular increases. In 1923 the duty on British tea was completely removed. In 1924 a reduction of 8d per 1b in duty was made on cut and plug tobacco. In 1928, in the interests of the timber industry, a duty was placed upon imported timber, and duties were again slightly adjusted to give added preference to British manufactures. In 1927 this latter policy was carried out still further. But thia adjustment was made by adding to duties on foreign articles approximately the same amount that had been taken from British articles. However, the result was a decrease of £175,000 in Customs over what it would have been had no adjustment been made. On the other hand the Customs duties on the articles mainly required by Mr. hash's "wealthy section" have been materially increased. In this connection we may note the increased duties on motor-vehicles and accessories, and petrol and other goods peculiar to the needs of that "section." The increase in total Customs duties during the past few years as clearly attributable to these latter items, together with general increases in the volume of imports. In 1921 duties on fo9i and nonalcoholic drinks accounted for 4.49 per cent, of the total Customs levy, while the figure for 1927 was 4.73 per cent.—show- 1 ing the. small increase of .24 per cent. For the same years the figures for thej textile and clothing group were 24.51 per cent, and 21.85 per cent, respectively—a reduction of 2.66 per cent. From these two groups ■which vitally concern the poorer section of the community, it is apparent that the so-called reorganisation of taxation has not thrown the wealthy man's burden on to the shoulders of the poor man, as claimed by Mr, If ash; but the exact opposite is what las actually occurred: the poorer people have gained by the lowering of Customs duties on the necessities of life, while the increase of total Customs revenue is a result o£ the increased importation of motor-cars and other "luxuries."—l am etc., ' SENECTUTOR.