Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1890. Mr Pirani and the Property Tax.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue III, 14 October 1890, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1890. Mr Pirani and the Property Tax.

On Saturday Mr Pirani, the labour candidate, desired it to be understood that he was not standing only in the interests of the labourers, but of all the working classes, especially" small farmers. With two exceptions, those of the owners of the Oroua Downs and the Carnarvon and Moutoa es?, tates, every elector in this district is' either a working man or a small farmer, hence we do not see the necessity of Mr Pirani making, in such, a marked manner, his desire to re- , present this , constituency as a " labour-" candidate. It appears impossible to suppose that the residents within this electorate are at all likely to select a representative of the large landowners, against their own . interests. It is therefore just as clear, that no man seeking their support would sail under any other colours than those Mr Pirani hoisted on Saturday night. The landowners, large and small, are naturally anxious for a diminution in taxation, but ■ they desire to avoid the whole burden being thrown upon the land, on the ; lines suggested i\v the single taxers. Mr Pirani is not prepared to go the whole length of the single, .taxers, bnt, to try and reach his foe, the larjro landowner, he is quite prepared to spill his brother's blood, the small , farmer's, in the attempt. He" would sweep away the property tax and impose a one per cent tax on all the unimproved land in the colony. There are, he saya, and heisi correct, 75 million pounds worth of.unimi proved land, and a tax of one per cent will yield £750,000 a year ! ! ! i At elections it" is refreshing to find how easy revenue raising can be • made. Why did no member of Par-

liament ever introduce such a proposal ? We do not undertake to answer for the late members of the House, but we will give our readers our reasons for supposing that such a proposal was utterly impracticable and unfair.

The taxable real property was only 45f million pounds worth, and the taxable personal property close on 39 millions, and tbo two together, at one penny in tho pound, produced £855"|000. Thu proposal to tax at one per cent, the 75 millions of unimproved land, means the withdrawal from everybody holding land, the exemption of j,£.iiQ.O hitherto enjoyed, so that every farmer, no matter how small his holding, will be liable to taxation,' for the sin of owning land, if every bit of it is not improved. Th^s proposed tax of one- per cent is no trifle, at any rate to any one who dislikea paying the present property tax, as it means a rise from eight shillings 'and four pence in the hundred pounds to twenty shillings each hundred pounds.

It is not possible from the returns, ttp^State the value of the unimproved lands that are included in the non- , taxable real estate of the Colony and we have to let that go by inference. Hmvever the total value of the real estate of "the Colony is ill millions, from which has to be deducted over 12 millions for Crown Lands, sfmillions for Native Lands and 42 \ millions for non-taxable lands (ex■enjpted) -and. nearly 9 millions for Church Education and Municipal Lands, which therefore only leaves 42 millions for tax purposes in round figures — which however is, as we have shown previously 45£ millions, as a portion of ihe Native Land is probably available for taxation. Under these circumstance!? it is impossible to describe the fact to be that private owners have 75 millions worth of unimproved land, as with the taxable and exempted values there should only be 88 millions worth of land in the Colony liable for taxation, except the lands belonging to the Crown and Natives. As there is stated to be 75 millions worth of land unimproved, we can take it for granted that the Crown and Native Lands are included, and as they total to 18 millions we have before us the fact that a very large proportion of lands at present exempted are unimproved. For, taking 18 millions (the Crown and Native Lands) from 75 millions (unimproved land) leaves 57 millions, and there are only 45| millions of taxable lands!!! Even ■ supposing, and it is not a fact, that every land owner owning more than ten thousand acres of land had not improved their properties, as they are only represented to own 15J- millions worth, we have -the fact that 41^- millions of other people's property need improving, and as the total value of all lands is 88 millions (taxable and also exempted) it shows that half of the. smaller properties have not been improved. Nothing can show clearer than these totals that if. a tax ,6f one per cent is levied on the unimproved land the large land owners will only pay on 15£ millions and the smaller owners on 4H millions. This proposal i.s on a par with Mr Millar's "statement at tho labour 'conference, that the Unionists were quite satisfied to lose £14,000 if. they made their opponents lose .£22,000 ; only Mr Pirani and his friends stand to loso nothing — only the farmers. Mr Pi rani lias been .misled by totals into which. lie never looked, but certainly for .not doing so he is to blame. It is clear he will never get his £750, 000 a year by his proposal, unless the tax is made two per cent instead of one. To spite the large landowner he. smites the small owner, and . permits the. owners of personal property amounting to 39 millions to go scot free, as 4 jyeli as the owners ot 4H millions of real property.

That the Property tax, might be amended so as to. be progressive, is open to consideration, but .to. abolish it in order to replace it with the proposals made on . Saturday night •wpuk] : be the height of folly.