TAXATION OF FARMERS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 1 August 1929, Page 9

TAXATION OF FARMERS

LAND tax or income tax? ,By Telegraph—Special to “The Mail") CHRIS! CHURCH, 31st July. Let taxation be levied on the income (mat a man earns each year. Tax heavily the man who earns the big income; but don t levy a tax that simply means cutting a. slice off a man’s capital each year.” Thus tersely and oneily a man interested in the land tax and its effects voiced th e opinion that the land tax should be abolished. ■_hecpfarmers are finding much fault with the, present system of taxation and a Sun reporter who made inquiries to-day gathered the impression that a movement to effect an alteration would he strongly supported. “We arc of the opinion that taxation would |be far mole equitably distributed among the community if the, land tax were removed and the income tax made gene•ial,” said -Mr W. H. Nicholson, secretary of the _ Canterbury Shcepowners’ union. ihe hind itax has increased Horn £767,000 in 1913-14 to £1,154,000 in 1928. Though some farmers do not pay income tax they arc paying out each year irrespective of the income earned. Tho land tax particularly hits a man who is trying to work a iarin on which there is a heavy mortgage, because lie really pays twice. He pays the land tax and he lias to pay the mortgagee sufficient interest to recoup the mortgagee for the income tax th e mortgagee has to pay on the interest. The land tax is the first mortgage on the land, really, and the so-called first mortgagee is really the second mortgagee. The suggestion that freeholders do not pay income tax is true, but it has not been made sufficiently clear that the land tax is many times greater in some cases than the income tax could possibly be, even on the highest graduated basis.”