MOTOR-BODY BUILDING.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4939, 15 February 1926, Page 3

MOTOR-BODY BUILDING.

1300 WORKERS EMPLOYED.

TAXES TO ENCOURAGE THEM.

New Zealand motor-body builders have produced much good work (writes "Spotlight” in the Dominion), but .the agitation being conducted by them against imported or locallyassembled motor bodies of outside manufacture should cause motorists generally to putj on their thinking caps.

So far there Is, no indication .tha.t a locally made motor body can be produced anything like ais- cheaply as an imported body.

It is an excellent thing to support local industry, but the economic side of every local industry proposition none the less deserves, to be most carefully scanned. In the present instance there is, to. begin with, the broad question of how far the interests of .the local body-building trade should be permitted to over-ride the popular demand for inexpensive motor transport.

There are about 100,000 owners of motor vehicles, in the Dominion, and with every reduction in the price of motor vehicles' a further section of the public invests in them. The latest figures for 1924 show that there were employed in the coa,ch-building industry in New Zealand about 1300 persons. The value of the motor bodies built by them is not disclosed by the returns; but the principal statistics, relating to the industry as as follows :• — N.Z. Motor Body Building in 1924. Persons employed 1302 Wages paid £242,857 Motor bodies built 2545 Other vehicles, buit 10,821 Value of total vehicles built £260,371 Value of land, buildings, and plant £441,800 To encourage this industry a special tax on imported bodies is imposed. That is to say, an imported motor vehicle is first asses,ed for ad valorem duty on its total value, body included, and on this value there is levied a duty of 25 per cent, under the general tariff, or if of British manufacture, 10 per cent, under the preferential tariff. Having thus paid 10 to 25 per cent, in duty on the* value of an imported motor body, the importer has also to pay a special body tax. This duty ranges from £7 7s ,to £22 10p- perbody, under the general tariff, to £5 •to £l5 under the preferential tariff. While the ad valorem duties were levied for revenue purposes, the local body builder has. the advantage of them, plus the special duties imposed to protect his industry. The latter duties produce per annum the following sum: — Special. Body Tax on Imported Motors : Receipts, for 1924, £158,944. It will th up be seen that to encourage the body-building trade the importers of motor-cars in 1924 pa,id a sum' equal to £122 per head for every one of the 1302 persons engaged in the coachbuilding industry, which industry is by no means solely confined to the building of motor bodies. Looked at in another way, it. will be seen that the special tax on motor bodies would in three years, at its present yield, exceed the total sum invested in land, buildings, and pla,nt in the whole coachbuilding trade of the Dominion. The wages paid to the 13(>2 persons in the entire coachbuilding trade totalled £242,857. To enable a portion of these wages to be paid the purchasers of motpr vehicles were taxed to the extent of. £158,000. The total value of the 2*545 motor bodies and the 1082 carriages, etc., built in the Dominion was £260,371. The value of the motor bodies built is not disclosed, but it cannot have been very much greater than the £1'58,000 paid in the Customs motor body tax.

The coachbuilding trade, says, the tax on motor bodies is insufficient. A motor-car with a local body cosits as a, rule about £lOO more tjhan the same car with an imported body. The local, body is usually excellent, but are the benefits to be derived by building up .the body-making industry by increased Customs duties commensurate with the benefits to be derived, by bringing motor vehicle ownership within the means' of as large a number of people as possible ? There is a good deal to be said on both sides of this question, Australia put a duty of from 7% to 12% per cent, on motor chassis, and from £5O to £75 on the bodies. Its local bodymakers have a population of 6,000,000 to cater for; ours have but 1,300,000. This smaller field naturally reduces the scope' for economic production. Motor-cars generally are deafen in Australia than in New Zealand, the difference ranging from about £2O to £5O.

In view of the proposal now 1 mooted by the county councils that .the whole cos't of maintenance of main highways should be thrown on to the shoulders of motorists by the imposition of a petrol tax, the agitation for increased body duties deserves the careful attention of all motorista; Already motor vehicles are being taxed in Customs duties, annual license fees, and heavy traffic fees, to well on for £1,500,000 per .annum* —a tota,! in special taxation averaging out at £l2 per head per annum per motor vehicle owner.