MOTOR TAXATION

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVII, 17 November 1927, Page 6

MOTOR TAXATION

LORRY OWNERS’ VIEWS HEAVY TRAFFIC FEES TOO HIGH. PETROL TAX ALLOCATION CRITICISED. “This meeting feels it is not economically possible for motor' vehicle owners to meet the heavy taxation imposed, particularly upon heavy traffic, and urges that a full investigation be made to ascertain just how much they cam fairly pay. This meeting also views with concern the fact that no statutory provision has been made along the lines proposed bv the Minister of Public Works for the allocation of the 92 per cent, of the revenue raised under the Motor Spirits Taxation Bill. It is felt that expenditure of the money should not be left to the sole discretion of the Highways Board,” The above resolution was passed by motor lorry and motor omnibus owners at a meeting in Napier last night, when they voiced a determined protest against the increasing taxation on motor vehicles. The petrol tax was not opposed, several stating that they would be quite willing that it should be increased to sixpence a gallon provided they were relieved from payment of heavy traffic fees. CONCRETE EXAMPLES. “We all agree that some sort of taxation should be paid by users of the road,” said Mr I l ’. G. Smith, junr.. who presided, “but we are prepared to pay one tax, not three or four. With the way things are 1 am wondering where it is going to end. I have had an instance of six firms in Wellington given me. They own thirty vehicles which, in twelve months, consume 54,396 gallons 01 petrol. With a petrol tax of fourpence they will have to pay an additional £906 12s. Without this their annual taxation, made up of license fees, tyre tax, heavy traffic fees, and Hutt road fees, is £2736. At present on each vehicle there is an annual tax of £93 which, with the petrol tax, will be increased to £123. 1 say: Where is there another country "in the British Empire that is paving such a tax? 1. personally, believe in one tax for all. preferably a petrol tax without exemptions We want the farmers to stand behind us in our fight against the putting up of restrictions which will be almost impossible to combat. It seems that the Government is trying iu wipe us out.

“I can give you an instance of what is going on.’’, he continued. “An official of the Government approached a certain Hastings carrier, asking him what price he charged for carting wool from a certain station in Hawke’s Bay. Next the fanner was approached bv the official, who quoted him a cheaper price to do the carting. The fanner was. however, loyal to the man who had given him good service in the past. Is that fair business? Why should the Government hire lorries and come into competition with private enterprise. Only last Sunday prices were cut hv the Government against a man who had done the work for years of conveying a picnic party out to the beach.” Mr D. Harvey: The Government beat us with one of its ’buses in a job to Puketapu. • • Mr Smith: We have always been given to understand that the,Government 'buses are being used as a feeder to the railways, but such is not the case in this instance HOW THE MOTORIST PAYS. “I consider .that the Government at the present time is absolutely motor taxation mad,” said Mr H. Anderson. “The first thing that we. as motor owners, should do is to urge the Government to set up a Board or Commission to ascertain what is a fair and just tax and just how much we can pay. I believe that the petrol tax is the most equitable. License fees are fair, and we must look to them as a means of obtaining revenue from the smaller users. I will say that the registration system is undoubted!” the finest system ever brought in. It is one of the means by which cars, when stolen, mav he traced anywhere. The Government is now bringing in tremendous and unwieldy regulations which. I think, we should protest against. In March last there were 127.000 motor vehicle owners, not counting motorcycles, and with the proposed tax they will be paying about £1,250,000 a year. Splitting this up, von will find that the motorist is paying £114.000 in heavy traffic licenses. £149,000 in tyre tax, £220,000 in registration fees, and £32,600 in drivers’ licenses, while the petrol tax is estimated to bring in £720,000.' It will be seen that the motorist who has to pay taxation in other directions also is becoming a very heavy taxpayer. DIFFERENT ALLOCATION WANTED. “It is proposed with the money brought in under the Motor Spirit Taxation Bill to allocate eight per cent, to the cities and larger towns, whilst 92 per cent, goes to the Main Highways Board. As a motorist. 1 consider that the money should lie allocated differently. The Highways Board should not be allowed to distribute that percentage, and quite a lot of comment has been rightly made bv the Automobile Associations concerning it. I think that it would be far more fair and equitable that the 92 per cent, was allocated to the various Highways District Councils in proportion to the number of vehicles registered in their districts. As matters stand now, the Highways Board is under no legal obligation io distribute its £660,000 a year from the petrol tax on the lines indicated bv the Minister when the bill was first before the House. INSURANCE OF PASSENGERS. “In regard to the heavy traffic lees. I consider that they are out of all proportion. There are four firms in Napier alone who are paying £l6OO in such fees, which does not seem to be right. We should pass a resolution protesting against the imposition by the Government of this heavy taxation on motor vehicles anil against its lescthy and unwieldy regulations.” Mr W. E. SHinders: What we are up against wit 1 ) the motor lorries and service cars is \!e heavy traffic fees. Mr Harvey: . don’t know where it is going to end. We are now paying £lO2 in tax on each of our 'buses on the Tarada le road. This includes

insurance as levied under the motor regulations. The petrol tax will make a difference of another £5O on each ’bus. It costs us £lO a year to insure the passengers travelling to Petane alone. Mr H. Anderson: I know of a firm which runs three 'buses, but keeps two more as a stand-by: yet they all have to be insured. This is most unjust. A system of floating policies should be allowed in such cases where not more than three 'buses, including those kept as a stand-bv. were on the road. Mr Smith, senr.: The Government won’t admit that for short distances the railway is obsolete. The resolutions as stated above were then passed.