INFLATED LAND VALUES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17684, 23 July 1919, Page 6

INFLATED LAND VALUES.

TO THE EDITOB.

Sir, —With the settling of returned soldiers on the laad and tho tremendously inflated price to which land has risen all ,pver New Zealand, I cannot see how the majority of soldiers at present in occupation are going to carry through. If they do it will taie some shrewd engineering on their part. They have gone in at the dearest time. When prices recede, as they must do, how is the " Digger"_ going to fare then? Private land speculation, which is at present going on, is the worst feature. When ordinary farming land has reached the value of £120 per acre, and up to as much as £150 an acre, it is high time something was being done to put a severe check on speculation. There is no land in New Zealand, even the very pick of it. which is worth moro than between £10 and £50 an acre for ordinary farming. Tho ridiculous prices now ruling are more than what the land in tho Old Country is worth ■for ordinary farming. In a young country likra New Zealand it is absolutely ridiculous and unreasonable. Land nationalisation is the only remedy. The freehold is good enough if this speculation that is rampant can be curbed. If New Zealand is going to keep her place in the world's trade she will have to cheapen her land and to give everyone a chance to get on the land, and to produce the wealth of the people. Such conditions as now exist must hinder progress. The ultimate effect will bY that people will emigrate to other countries or parts of the Empire where conditions are moro satisfactory. I can see hard times approaching. If a depression settled on Now Zealand it -will be a serious matter. Her very prosperity at the present moment may be oompared to a mere floating bubble. How is the payment of interest on the national debt to be accomplished with such inflated values as are at present prevailing? Everything must find a level shortly. The aggregation of land and wealth in the hands of a few will have to come to an end, and the sooner the better for all concerned. The. present land laws will have to be abolished, and a new system adopted, which can only bo obtained when a truly democratio government has come into power.—l am, eta, July 19. Returned Soldier. TO THK BDITOH Sib,—We have lately heard and read a good deal about the subject of land valuations, due mainly to tho land purchases of the Government for tho settlement of returned soldiers. Neither the Land Purchase Board nor tho prospective settlers seem to be satisfied, and it, is to be admitted that unless an intelligent basis is adopted by the Government Valuation Department it is extremely difficult to assess tho just value of land. I have never been able to understand, nor have I ever met anyone who understands, upon what basis tho department arrives at its valuations. W e have tho authority of the Commissioner of Crown Lands (Air Sadd) that the Government valuation is nover the selling value. This, he stated publicly in correspondence with Mr MacManus. 'What it is and how ', arrived at Mr Sadd did not explain! Then j wo have th e Purchase Boards declaiming | against the avarice of would-be sellers of I land, and we have had oxamplc-s given of : their asking from 50 to 100 per cent, above j the valuations made for taxation purposes, I which had been protested against as being j too high—that is, too hisrh to pay taxes on. I but not too high for solo! There seems ! inconsistency here. In roalitv often it is | not so, but it is the effect of the method (or ! want of it) in the Valuation' Department's : work. The officers com© into a district every five or six years and, without locai knowledge thoy proceed to <ruess a± values. and wait for protests, when a system, of bargaining is adopted, coupled with the juggling of land valuea and improvement values. If you will agree to so much more going on the improvements they will take ' it oft' the land or vico versa. If taxation were on land only this could not bo done, and the department would be put in the position of standing by its valuations, as it should do, and bo prepared to take the land at 10 per cent above its valuation."' If . the landowner knew this.to bo the practice he would be careful about protesting against over valuations. Provided the basis of land tapition minus improvements is uniform, fair, and just for land as kuid of equal quality and situation, it does not realiy '. matter whether tho valuation is £20 or £40 per acre, as both Government and local bodies require a maximum of revenue fronl tho rateable area. Hence if 6d in the pound is required at a valuation of £'i 0 per acre, 3d in the pound would bo suflici'-:-! at a valuation of £40 per acre. But t!v department's prewrit haphazard guesswc:-'. methods of valuing simply produces a w. for a low vakJation to escape taxation w-hich, as a result, others must" carry. Xr ■ one takes Government valuations sorions'v. for,_ as Mr Sadd says, thev arc never" tho - selling value. I havo seen land sold ::* auction at 10 times tlto Govornntcitt va'un- : tion, and I know of many ir.ivta.ncoo whr:. the Government has paid 50 per cent, run" over above the valuations. 1 observe that would-b? sellers asking from i 50 to 100 per cent, above Government valtin- i tions have been warned that they will lv j marked men. Their coflsts are noted, n.?n ! i will be remembered at TMSrt valuations. Thi~ ! is a vindictive attitude and absolutely ir»- j moral. Moreover, it would only stultifv tlie department's past action. Let it ■?aluo fairly, justly, and xmiforrjiry, and be

prepared to back its action by taking the land at 10 per cent, over the valuation. Under present conditions of valuing, it seems to me that everyone is entitled to .get the best valuation he can from the department tor rating purposes, and there can bo no doubt that,'as a sellor h 0 is equally entitled to get the best price possible for his property. There is .no obligation on the Government's part to take the land if it considers his price too high, and no attempt should be made at coercion, for that is, -what it amounts to, when the landowner is warned that his case will be noted far next valuation. Probably most of these owners have a more accurate knowledge of the current value of land than the department, and probaWy also they would not object to have their" land valued at its selling quotation for taxation purposes, provided all lands were treated similarly. Instances could bo given of land valued by the department for taxation purposes at £2000 per acre, and of the existence within a stone's throw of it, of land of equal value and situation at £35 per acre. The application of the Rating and Unimproved Values Act on the block system, irrespective of improvements, is the only means of ensuring fair valuations for all purposes. If it be desirable to tax improvements it should be an entirolv separata Act.—l am etc., Otakatj. July 21.