TAX COMMISSION.

Hokitika Guardian, 10 May 1924, Page 2

TAX COMMISSION.

AUCKLAND SITTINGS. [by Tia.KonAi’ii— ri**.n chess association - .] AUCKLAND, May ?. The Taxation Commission sat to-day. Mr J. («. Haddon, barrister and solicitor, said that he objected to land tax because it did not tax the individual aeeording to his ability to pay, because it taxed the man who had no money to pay and often actually taxed him on debts he owed, because it was an ahitrary tax on one class of property, and because of the difficulty in collecting. Income tax should he regarded in the light of a family tax, allowance being made for the other adult members of the family. Companies should lie treated in the same way as

persons. A person or firm could not , compete on level terms with companies if the company paid no income tax./*' No difference should lie made ill taxation of incomes from debentures and from other sources. There might he added the third class, suggested Mr Hartley Withers, income produced by inherited wealth or received hv gift.

.Mr Herbert S. Hawkins, farmer of Hamilton, and director of tbe Farmers’ Auctioneering Company said that the company had to increase its net profit hv 35 nor cent to provide for Gevcrnnicnr. taxation The Company liacl tlino earning departments, two on .-i commission basis, and the earnings coin! not he increased without increasing the rates of commission. Without substantial relief the company could not carry on indefinitely. Under a * nominal rate of taxation the company was able to pay its way and biuld up a very modest reserve of £46,200 out of profits in twelve years, hut the highor tux gradually decreased the amounts until they actually ceased, in spite of abnormally good trading conditions before the depression of 1921, which turned a net profit of nearly £60,000 to a substantial loss. In 1921 the net profit was £59,852 and taxation £27,309. In 1622 there was a loss of £1383, taxation being £1519. Last year’s profit was £207 and taxation £1443. No divblends were paid during.the last twp_,A^

years. As regarded his own taxation as a farmer, land tax on 795 acres in 1«1 •> was LI 13s 4d, and on 70!) acres in 192(1, £ll6 4s. In addition income tax had been levied on portions of bis gross income without reference to net income. 11 is net income for the past four years amounted to £235 and he paid £265 in taxation. Mr George Cublj, farmer, of Pnriri, urged the abolition of land tax. lie paid £2153 (is Id to tho Thames County Council as rates and taxes and £lOl in land tax on his farm, which carried fifty dairy cows. The Hon George l'owlds gave evidence advocating the gradual increase of land values taxation until values apart from improvements, ceased to have any selling value, until the whole economic rent went to the community. Il<* asserted that Customs duties pressed most heavily on the poor man.