INCREASED TAXATION

Hokitika Guardian, 17 August 1931, Page 5

INCREASED TAXATION

A REFORMER’S MISCALCULATION

(From a Correspondent.)

WELLINGTON, August 15

Li the course of his contribution to Biudget debate in the House of Rep esentatives the other day, Air A. Harris, the member for Waitemata, wh> figures among the financial authorities of the Reform Party, juggled so adroitly with the figures of the 1 inane al Statement that lie made it appear that during its twenty-seven months e‘f ot.ee the United Party had increased the taxation of the country by £7,898,000. Having his assertion taken to task by the “Evening Post,” a strictly nonparty publication, Mr Harris attempts to extricate himself from his faux by rearranging his figures. “What I did say,” lie now claims, “was that, a.-; compared with the last complete year of the Reform administration taxation had been increased, or would he increased, iff the Budget proposals of .fin United Government were adopted, by an aggregate of £7,898,000. The aggregate United Party increases in tin years referred to are therefore:—■ 1929-30, £2,325,000; 1930-31, £1,733,000; 1931-32, including Budget proposals £3,840,000 a total of £7,808,009.” “Air Harris’s explanation makes his position worse,” the “Post” retorts. “He draws his comparison with 1923 as the last complete Reform year, but it should he made with 1929, as in that year all taxation was collected under Acts passed while Reform was in c flic3 —thus.making a difference off £700,090 Then he adds the increases all tege her, though on his own showing the £18,878,000 of 1930-31 (which include! unemployment tax) was lesg than the £l9/470,000 collected in 1929-30.” “Finally,” the ‘‘Post” observes, “he taxes the estimated yield of new taxes for 1931-32 and counts them all as increases—-thus having a total of £3,840,000 —whereas the actual increase on 1930-31, including unemployment tax and the Post Office surplus (which is really inadmissible), is £l,612,000. His calculation is so wildly inaccurate that he would have been better advised not to make the position worse by explaining how lie made it.”