UNIMPROVED LAMPS.

Otaki Mail, 10 August 1923, Page 3

UNIMPROVED LAMPS.

THE LAW EXPLAINED. : —— 1 It is not an unusual experience io ’ tiuit new legislation hastily condemned ' from want of knowledge of its opera- ’ tion and intention. An instance occurs in regard io the provision in the Land * and Income Tax Act, 1020, which ini- 1 pose’s certain penalties in regard to f land tax upon land which has not been improved. This provision is cm- 1 bodied in section 0 of the Act. A southern paper quotes the ease of 1 a holder of 9,000 acres of low-quality 1 laud, who, upon complaining to the 1 Laud and Income Tax Department 1 that he was penalised under the clause. * stated above (whereas his laud was in- «• capable of carrying the improvement ' required), was notified that he would be relieved of such penalties. The t paper added “While this is not at all - satisfactory t„ the property owners, it ( is a clear admission that the penalty ! has been imposed witlltmt sufficient in- - vestigation being made.” The position in regard to this new- ’ law was clearly set out to the Sheep- 1 owners’ Federation in an address by ' the Commissioner of Taxes last Week. 1 The latted explained that the Depart < mc-nt accepted tko \ uluatiou Depart- 1 ment’s data in regard to the improve-| - merits 'effected. Every landowner (the 1 * law applied to all lands outside bor- 1 ougks) had been given notice of assess- ! ment in cases where the figures show- 1 ed that improvements were not in ac- 1 eordance with the requirements of the ’ Act. It was then the duty of the taxpayer to write and state the facts of the case, and the appeal would be treated upon its merits. The law’ distinctly made provision for this appeal, and the notice of assessment sets that out. What had transpired, therefore, in the case of the North Otago sottier had been quite in accordance with tko law. Tho (Commissioner, at the conference mentioned above, said that he wished to give careful consideration to all cases in which owners wore of opinion that their properties were sufficiently improved. The whole object of the provision in the Act was to 1 avoid remission jof taxation, and to ( impose additional land tax on land* ! which was being held purely for speeu- | lntive purposes and with out improve- 1 merits being effected. i