WOOL KINGS’ TAX

Hokitika Guardian, 10 August 1929, Page 6

WOOL KINGS’ TAX

’MINISTER ANALYSES PROPOSAL

! FE W FARMERS AFFECTED

WELLINGTON/ Aug. 8,

Dealing with an Opposition suggestion that the super land tax will prevent large land-owners continuing development of their area the Hon. E. A. .Ransom ,Minister of Public Works, remarked in the House to-night that he was personally acquainted with many land-owners who would come under the super-tax and his impression was that these were the areas not properly developed Their owners usually took a trip Home annually, and every other year bought a new high-priced motorcar. In most cases their lands were seriously neglected and would be all the better for sub-division. There was no greater encouragement to land aggregation than a system under which landowners paid no income tax. The result was that a land-owner making a big income looked for a similar investment which would be untaxed. Efforts had been made to create the impression that the new r land tax was general, but it was so limited that if asked to give its true name he would call it “The Wool Kings’ Tax.” Dairy farmers could hardly he affected when the tax did not start till £12,500 unimproved value. Only those with a valuation of this amount would be called on for an income tax return. Many of his sheep-owning friends had expressed surprise that they had been let off with taxation so long. Now it was said that they would be ruined because for the first time they were asked to bear their share of New Zealand’s annual burden of five millions of war taxation. He could prove that the mortgage exemption changes would not affect the small farmers. He had it on reliable authority that the changes in mortgage exemption would . affect 2200 out of 80;000 farmers, none •of whom owned less'Hh'an £7500 in capital value. Mr Ransom suggested' that' critics of i taxation on farmers should have in mind'the great concessions in reduced railway freights on lime and manures ; and- the immense service rendered by the Department of Agriculture. It - was obvious that the primage duty was the hardest tax to impose, but it was the easiest to take off. The principle ! was-that each and all should bear some burden, and it involved not more than 2s lid per head, though it might mean £5 on every car imported.