CHURCH PROPERTY

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 3824, 28 July 1928, Page 2

CHURCH PROPERTY

*■ EXEMPTION FROM RATES AND LAND TAX.

RETURN REFUSED.

It is very rarely that a motion asking for a return is made the subject of a division, but this occurred in the Legislative Council on Thursday.

The Right Hon. Sir Robert Stout moved that a return be laid upon the table showing: (1) The values of the lands occupied for churches and chapels mentioned in paragraph (c) under the interpretation “Rateable property” in section 2 of the Rating Act, 1925; (2) the aable to local bodies by the owners of such churches and chapels but of sulh churlhes and chapels but for Lhe enactment of the said paragraph; (3) the value of land exempt from land tax under paragraph (i) of subsection (1) of section 69 and under section 70 of the Land and Income Tax Act, 1923, on the ground that the lands are held in trust for religious purposes, and the amount of land tax that would be payable but for such exemption.

Sir Robert Stout said he doubted whether the people were sufficiently aware of the very large amount of taxation paid in the form of rates. The local body rates in the Dominion last year totalled £5,888,021. The capital value of all property in the Dominion, land, buildings, and other improvements, was £618,264,093, the rateable value being £578,732,503. No rates at all were levied on property valued at nearly £40,000,000. The rateable value of Government property and property otherwise exempt from rates was not shown anywhere. In his motion he was merely asking for information. He was not saying that the exemptions were right or wrong. The motion was seconded by the Hon. J. Craigie. The Leader of the Council (Rt. Hon: Sir Francis Bell) said the Government had no objection to provide part of the return asked for, or approximately another part. But in regard to the value of land occupied by churches or chapels for land tax, he thought the value of , the improvements was not very much. He. did not think that a church building in itself added very much to the value of the land. No return could give the capital value of land with a church or chapel on it. He was quite willing to provide a return of the unimproved value of such lands, and also the amount of land tax that would be payable. A return of the rateable value of such lands could not be provided within any reasonable time, or with any reasonable amount of labour, but the equivalent could be given. The rating authority with respect to any piece of land was not limited to any one authority—rates were levied by harbour boards, drainage boards, power boards, and other local bodies. Accurate returns could only be got by circularising all local bodies, and that could not be done within a reasonable time. He would like Sir Robert Stout to in- , sort the word “approximately” in his motion. The motion was taken to a division, and was defeated by 14 votes to 8.