RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUE.

Feilding Star, Volume XVII, Issue 29, 2 August 1895, Page 2

RATING ON UNIMPROVED VALUE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE STAR. Sir, — Your correspondent, Mr Wc:t, thinks I have not made the matter clear enough. In writing to the press I try to put in as many ideas as possible, con- I soqucntly I write tersely, ko as not to take up too much space. Review : — Ist. There is uo unimproved value of laud in New Zealand ; 2nd. The application of any law passed on such a fallacy would bo unworkable. In regard to the first assertion, will anyone deny that a hundred-acre section iv standing bush near Colyton is worth more to-day than it was twenty years ago? The land has not been improved, but the value has by the roads, bridges, &c. This shows that any law founded on the so called " unimproved value " is founded on .i fallacy, and consequently the law itself will prove unjust. In regard to the application, the clerk of the Auckland City Council has shown that if this law pass that the Council will not be able to raise sufficient rates to pay interest, &c, as the Loan Act under which money was raised only allows them to levy 2s in the i.\ Again, those farmers who complain about being rated for fencing, &c, do so without just cause. Let us take for examples four adjoining farms of 200 acres each, owned by A, B, C, aud D. respectively. A fells, grasses, fences, &c, the whole farm. He makes, say. 30s per acre or an income of £300 [>cl- annum. B fells only 50 acres, being too poor to fell the rest. He make X"75 per annum income. Cis a wealthy man with other means besides the farm. He clears everything — logs and stamps ; puts up a splendid set of buildings— residence, conservatory, stables, fernery, kc. ; and by high cultivation makes, say, X'soo per annum off the laud. D is a speculator, aud lets the land lie idle. According to the proposed law, A, B, C, aud D would pay exactly the same rates ! — i.e., B, a poor man would pa}' as much as the rirli C. Of course such an absurd and unjust law — founded on a fallacy - is intended to hit J), the speculator. So much, sir, for our New Zealand so-called Stutomon ! But it must ho borne iv mind that D loses money daily by not improving his section. Certain of our laws passed witiiiu the past year or so aimed at the most unjustly aspersed "social pests" really hib the poor. The oft-repcafced argument — if it can be called one — that by relieving improvements of taxation you encourage industry is all bunkum. The wealthy will always spend money on their h-.x---urics, at whatever cu.st — <.■ g ., the old gold-diggers aud their whiskey at a guinea a bottle. The only just and sound principle on which taxation should be based is that everyone should be ta\od according to their means, and not the poor taxed in a higher ratio than the rich, as would undoubtedly be tlio case under a " Ratjng ou Unimproved Value Act." I am, Ike, Gi'.ouck Wilks. Feilding, 29th July, 1H95.