The Hokitika Guradian SATURDAY, AUGUST 12. 1922 THE WEEK.

Hokitika Guardian, 12 August 1922, Page 2

The Hokitika Guradian SATURDAY, AUGUST 12. 1922 THE WEEK.

Thf report of the special committee set up hy the Government to investigate on the incidence of taxation and report thereon 1 as been tabled m the House, during the week. Commenting thereon the “LyttdTtnn Times” ,says the report shows that the committee performed its task in a perfunctory manner, having evidently made no attempt to examine the nature and effects ot the numerous forms of taxation >y which diiMi.*; the last few years the Govern' ent has acquired money to waste and has thereby handioapped pro. duction. industry and commerce. The report deals with only two or three'

forms o- taxation, and with one exception, in our opinion, it treats even these with scant intelligence. The exception is that the majority of the companies’ earnings being taxed in the bulk the levy should be made on individual shareholders. This is sensible enough; »t is, indeed, so obvious and so much in iccordanco with the general practice outside New Zealand that the labours of a Special Committee were not required to make the discovery or to instruct the Government and the Parliament on the point. Beyond this recommendation, which could hardly have heel different, the people who will nave to pay for this report receive in return nothing that is useful and some things which can only excite adverse criticism. There are no references t<» the general scheme of taxation the pressure of indirect taxation on varying incomes; tho influence of Customs duties on the cost of living; the system of death duties; the effect of Uic “passing on” of income taxation, so that in respect of a large slice of the total payments the nominal payers arc merely collectors from the consum-

Thk principles of taxation appear to have received little or no consideration from the committee, and consequently the report lacks comprehension and is of small value for tho guidance of the legislature. Indeed, with the exception of its recommendation ns to the taxation of company earnings, the report is not easily understandable. How a majority of intelligent investigators could decide against discrimination between earned and unearnt d income is difficult to fathom and the same criticism applies to tlio committee’s objection to a reduction of the income exemption in the case of Unmarried taxpayers. It is one of the gross injustices of the New Zealand system r.) income tax. particularly since the rates wore enlarged for war revenue. that single men with £6 a week have been allowed to entirely escape and that married men have been penalised more heavily in consequence. A simple clause in the present Act making the exemption £2OO instead of £3OO. with an allowance of £IOO for a wife would do no more than confer a small measure of justice upon one of the most ill-treated among all classes of taxpayers—the salaried family man—and it world commend itself, we should sav, to all reasonable people, except the majorit’ - of Mr Massey’s Special Committee. The committee has recommended the immediate revision of tlie scale ot income taxation to provide for a maximum rate not exceeding 5s ia the £. but how the noeessary tax-reve-nue 's to be obtained the committee does not appear to have considered.

If the recommendation to tax company shareholders instead of companies were adopted, this would mean raising the maximum, instead of lowering it—and quite right, too, for a tax of 10s in the £. or even more, on the income of an individual (not a company) would be a small hnrdsliip to impose as a contribution to the needs of the country through the Great War. But, whether

the style of company tax be changed or not, 't should have occurred to the committee that the reduction of the maximum rate to 5s must involve a stiff incense in. the minimum and succeeding lates, meaning greater hardship than ever to the bulk of the taxpayers. I-or the rest, the committee's recommendations are not of vital interest. It would he wrong to say that we are disappointed with the report, liecaus ’ i nr expectations were small. But it may be said, and it should be said, the committee appears to have tarried out its task perfunctorily. It appears to have refused an opportu- i nity to investigate and discuss the I

principles of taxation, the various taxes imposed in this country and their effects upon the community. We hope Mr .Massey will not tell the people that tie has obtained an inquiry into and a report upon the general incidence of taxation, for that is precisely what has not taken place.

Thk inn nil report of the Department of balm i states that the awards and indust" ; >| agreements actually in force on March Hist, 1922, totalled 548 (lastyear o%). The smaller number of awards, agreements, etc., made during tne year is accounted for by the fact that on the worker’s side there was little expect in the way of increased wages, arm on the employer’s side the Coin's stabilisation scheme rnedered it useless for employers to apply for a rcdiut'Oii. The reduction in the number of awards and industrial agreements now in force is explained by one award having taken tho place of a number 'if agreements in several instances Our of a total of 147 disputes dealt with t>y the Commissioners and Conciliation ( (Hindis 112 (equal to 76.2 per cent.) were settled or substantially settled by the Commissioners lias also declined considerably owing no doubt to the Court's stabilisation scheme and to the fact that wages on the whole, have tended to slightly decrease. One side or the other has preferred to a greater extent than in normal times to refer the matters in dispute to the Arbitration Court. In the year 1919-14 there wave 13,469 factories registered under tae Factories Act with a total of

87 517 workers. In 1916-17 the* number of factories had fallen. The report shows that there were at Maroli 31st 1922. nine industrial associations of employers with a total of 55 affiliated unions and 29 associations of workers with 205 affiliated unions. The industrial unions of employers numbered 141 with 533“ members. The Aucklam industrial d ; strict had 40 unions with 1488 members, Wellington 35 unions with 1 1032 members, Canterbury 25 unions with 1609 members, and Otago and Southland 30 unions with 923 members, j The grand total of industrial unions of ! workers was 418, with a combined menu 1 bership o 97,719. Of this number | Auckland district bad 103 unions with I 26.911 members, Wellington 88 unions ! with 31.2 1 2 members, Canterbury 6< ! unions with 15.368 members atld Otago | and Soutnland 98 unions with 18,815 members

AceoumNd to the annual report just available, the police of the Dominion during 1921 bad to deal with over 26,000 offences and 1070 serious crimes. The latter show an increase of 191, but as an unusually largo number of t charges occurred during the year, the I increase is not serious as the figures indicate. Two of ten murders during the | year were not followed by detection of | the offenders, these being the Timaru 1 and Ore. bynn cases, but the Commis- ! sioner of Police states that these crimes ! arc still under investigation. Of sen- ' ons crimes the greatest increase was ; burglary and receiving stolen property. J There was a net increase of 446 in •the agg'vgate .number of ordinary of- | fences, Uk> chief increases being: | Found on licensed premises after hours, : 307; failing to maintain wives and children 264; house or shop breaking 168 false orctences 154. Drunkenness showed a Jr :p of 307 cases. Breach of prohibition orders declined in number 279. The number of prosecutions of hotelkeepers 515, showed an increase of seventeen, while £1914 was collected as fines from slv grog sellers, this resulting in a gain of £1476 compared with the Cost of detection. In recording 245 prosecutions and 194 convictions under the Gaming Act the Commissioner declares that until the pro- ' vision in the Act giving persons charged with being bookmakers the right of trial by jury is repealed, it is almost a waste of time to prosecute. During the year the polico succeeded in obtaining clear evidenco of book-making in several cases. Prosecutions were instituted and the accused persons were committed for trial. In all but one case, in which it is alleged there was some local feeling against the bookmaker the juries cither disagreed or ac-t-quitted in face of very plain directions from the presiding Judges. Finding that convictions could not lie obtained under the 1920 Act and the police bad ' to fall lsick upon the 1908 Act and prosecute for keeping common gaming houses. This bad Ivcen done with considerable success.