REDUCTION IN TAXATION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2487, 30 September 1922, Page 4

REDUCTION IN TAXATION.

NEAR A MILLION LESS. WELLINGTON, Sept. 26. The Land and Income Tax Amendment Bill was introduced in Parliament to-day by Governor-General’s Message. In reply to Mr Wilford, the Premier said that the leading features of the Bill were a reduction in the super land tax from per cent, to 10 per cent. He was doing this because the financial position had somewhat improved, though in doing so ho was aware that ho was taking some risk. He had carefully considered the matter and liad come to the conclusion that it would be better to take the risk and trust to the industry of the people to increase production. There was also some alteration in the matter of the land tax on native lands, it having been brought to the attention of the Government that in some cases the land tax was far in excess of the rent paid for the land held under lease, and that was not a good position. Tins they had endeavoured to remedy in the Bill, and while they had done some-, thing, they might not have yet have done everything required. So far as the income tax was concerned, he proposed to abolish the super tax altogether, and these concessions in the land and income taxes would mean a loss of revenue of £929,100. Members: How are you going to make it up? Mr Massey said he had not lost sight oi the fact that in the past five months of the financial year we had saved £2,100, UUU in expenditure. This reduction in taxation must come; high taxation was killing industry and creating unemployment. Ibis proposal would coino into effect this financial year. Clause 8 of the Bill dealt with exemptions, giving the benefit of an exemption to grandparents who were bringing up orphan children. It further provided that m future coal was to be treated as a wasting nsset under the land tax just as timber was. At present company taxation was not touched as such, but of course the companies would benefit by the general reductions, v ■ Mr McCombs contended that only those with incomes of over £IOOO a year would bo assisted by these proposals. . Mr Sullivan wanted to know if the Government could give this revenue away, were they going to provide pensions for the blind as promised V Mr Massey contended that no promise was ever made to provide pensions for the blind. He would like to do so, but he had not £<lo,ooo a year to give away. He contended that the class which would benefit ns much as any were the workers, whose employment had been curtailed bo cause employers could not afford to pay for labour. Mr Holland maintained that the large income tax payers were the people who were going to benefit. If a man had the income, ho did not require relief. Mr Massey interjected that everyone knew a merchant passed the income tax on to the customers, thereby increasing the cost of living. The workers would participate in tho consequent reduction in the cost of living. Mr Massey, in reply to further speeches, said he had promised the people that he would reduce taxation, reduce the cost of living, reduce the cost of Government, and readjust the finances of the country. 'lhis he was doing and endeavouring to get back to normal as soon as possible. Coming to tho proposals in the Bill, he explained that two years ago he had gathered in two millions of taxation more than was required. That money he had set aside as, a reserve. He had been using some of it for various purposes, which was perfectly legitimate, and ho proposed to use half a million of this fund to make up the loss in revenue due to tho reductions in taxation.