Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A DEPUTATION

HARBOR BOARDS AND, TAXES

'Our Parliamentary Correspondent.)

WELLINGTON, Sept. 30,

Protests against the provisions of certain clauses of land and Income TaxBill were made to-day by a deputation of the Harbour Association which waited on the Premier. Mr J. G. Harkness, President of the Association, said the objection of the Association was to Sections 22 and 23 which required Harbour Boards to become tax gatherers by making them responsible for income tax on debentures they had issued. The new provisions meant that investors would not receive the full rate of interest that the -Boards contracted to pay. This fact would affect detrimentally the Board’s financial position for

uvestors would not be so ready to take

up debentures. Many people holding Harbour Board debentures were not liable to income tax at till and they would have the utmost difficulty in securing from the Government a refund of the amount the Boards would he compelled to collect. Mr Massey interjected that Boards wer not required to pay the tax, but merely to collect. There would be no breach of faith on the part of Boards. Mr Harkness did not accept this state ment of the position. Investors would consider there had been a breach of faith and the' credit of Harbour Boards would suffer. There would be just as much a breach of faith as if Government collected the tax on its own free of income tax debentures. Mr Massey—Debentures are taxable at present, and Government is losing a orreat deal annually, because they have not been able to collect what omrht to be paid by people holding them. The Bill proposed to place Boards in the same position as companies ill the matter of collection of the tax on their shares. The Bill nppßed only to interest paid in New Zealand. Mr Jiill (Napier) said Boards have to make provision to meet new conditions and have increased dues. Mr Massey assured the deputation that Government were not going to inflict any hardships upon harbour buildjpgs. Not one penny more was to be collected from them. Mr J. M. Dickson (Chalmers)— 1 hope some of our arguments have impressed you. Mr Massey-Well, they have not.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19201001.2.4

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 1 October 1920, Page 1

Word count
Tapeke kupu
365

A DEPUTATION Hokitika Guardian, 1 October 1920, Page 1

A DEPUTATION Hokitika Guardian, 1 October 1920, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert