THROWN AWAY

Hokitika Guardian, 28 August 1931, Page 8

THROWN AWAY

BUDGET REVENUE,

PUBLICT3ODY TRADING

(The Associated Chambers of Commerce of New Zealand).

The taxes that are to be levied on the community under the Budget proposals could have been reduced by many thousands of pounds—collectable annually—had the. Government availed itself of the untapped source of revenue that is provided by the levying of taxation on power boards, and on municipal gas and electric light undertakings operating in competition with private enterprise. For the second time in his Budget the Prime Minister has thrown away a means of considerable revenue, the use of which would have served the two-fold purpose of swelling the national exchequer and putting to rights a longstanding injustice that calls for rectification. However, not only has this means of revenue been ignored in face of strong representations, but additional 'taxation is Actually (levied Hn the Budget on these private trading concerns, adding still further to the burden they have to bear, while their competitors go free. The position is, That the city councils and gas companies of Wellington, Auckland, Christchurch, Napier and other places, are in competition in the supply of lighting, power and heat. In Christchurch the municipal electrical department competes with private traders bv selling electrical appliances to the puoiic, and even has sole agencies for goods of this class, besides which it carries out wiring contracts. This competition has been so serious that it has the effect of crushing private traders of long standing. This is simply because the private traders have to pay to the State heavy exactioils, from which municipal concerns, in common with power boards, are blissfully imm'une by the favour of a benevolent Government.

EFFECT OF NEW TAX. For 1930 the gas companies in the three cities named paid in land, income and debenture taxes the sum of £53,579. The electrical departments in competition with them pa.d nothing. Owing to the increase of 2b per cent, in the surtax provided by the 1931 Budget, the three gas companies will now have to pay an additional £8,458 per annum (Wellington £2,311, Auckland £4,079, Christchurch £2,068). Power boards and municipal electrical departments again pay nothing. Thus are the latter concerns better equipped than ever to wage war against private entefprise, which is further weakened by this attack of the Government on its flank. One of the effects of this taxation is that one section of the community is being served with a commodity at a cheaper rate than is another section, merely because the service is being given by a municipality or a power uoard, both of which are exempt from taxation. Conversely,, the 100,000 gas consumers in 'Wellington, Auckland and Christchurch at present contribute on an average £1 per annum taxation, while the consumers of electricity contribute nothing. This is manifestly unfair. Private concerns are being called on to pay extra taxation, while municipalities and power boards, which are showing very large profits, go on their blissful way unhindered, while tax-payers are unequally levied. All that is asked is that this competition should -be placed on a fair basis by income tax being levied on power boards and municipal trading departments, and that they be forbidden to hold solo agencies for appliances. Both the United and Reform Parties, on the hustings, promised such a reform as this, and the Prime Minister has since fully -subscribed to the principle involved, but the Budget, instead giving relief, imposes further taxation on private enterprise. In such a time of financial stress as the present, the expectation that the Government would readily avail itself of such an equitable form of taxation to swell the coffers of State, and coincidentally do justice by the commercial and tax-paying community, ,was reasonable. The realisation is lamentable. -