THE TAXATION QUESTION.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIV, Issue 9419, 15 April 1909, Page 8

THE TAXATION QUESTION.

■■v Per Press Association. Wellington, April 14. The motions passed by the conferonce of delegates from the Chambers of Commerce of New .Zealand re ’ ■ sneellng the graduated and mortgage taxes yesterday have caused a great deal of discussion. Sir Joseph Ward, PrimeMimster, replied to some of the statements made at a banquet last evening, but the commercial men are not satisfied and farther discussion took place at the meeting of delegates this afternoon.' -l ■ • By permission of the Conference, Mr O." N. Kettle was given the right to reply to Sir Joseph Ward. Mr Kettle said that he had to press his regret that he was not present at the dinner. He had read Sir Joseph’s speech and would first refer to the question of thegraduated tax. He had never said that the Department was charging tax on business buildings, but on lapd on whicn bdsiness premises _were erected. He was glad that MtP. Heyes (Commissioner of Taxes j had admitted that the Advance* to Settlers Offices had no more money t<y lend. There was no doubt’that the Department had done a great deal of good. Everybody was grateful for ( the assistance 1 it had given settlers. He was not speaking in any disparaging sense. Mr Kettle regretted that the Prime Minister haa refused to accept a large amount of money offered the Government for investment. The Government could compete on more favourable terms than the private individual and, for this reason, the mortgage tax should be removed. They hid to see that farther capital did. not leave the country. The man who was investing his money in mortgages should not have to pay a higher tax than the man .who invested his money in a business. Sir Joseph Ward had said that the Government had only borrowed£loo,ooo from the public in New Zealand. Daring the last ten years the national debt had increased _by 20 millions. How were they going to get that back if more capital- was not invested in the country? It was a fact that the fall in the price of wool bad contributed to the gduoy in the money market They had to remove all obstacles against the investment of capital in this country. The penalty capital had to bear should be removed. ... . Mr D.’ J. Nathjm asserted that the Premier did not state the facts as . they were actually put at the meet- - Ing and he went on to show grounds for his contention. The great question, as the speaker gathered from London advices, was not what the penal tax amounted to, to-d®y> bnt what would it amount to in* _a few years time. To speak about buildings as Sir Joseph Ward had done was simply to draw a red herring across the scent. He spoke as a friend of the Government. Regarding the Advances to Settlers Department he wished to say that they had nothing to object to in regard to the principle, but they desired to emphasise that the true object of that Department was to give advances up £SOO to small settlers and not to' come into opposition to the loan companies. The subject was not farther discussed. .... Auckland, April 14. The reports of tte discussion in Wellington by the delegates to the New Zealand Chambers of Commerce Conference on the subject of the mortgage tax and its effect on the money market, were brought under the notice of Mi Harold Beauchamp, ■Chairman of Directors of the Bank of New Zealand. Mr Beauchamp said he was very much in accord with some of .the views expressed, chiefly with those of Mr Kettle, of Napier, to the effect that if the tax on mortgages and debentures were repealed it would be followed by a considerable influx of capital to the Dominion for investment. “It will ■ ba remembered,” said Mr Beanchamp, “that prior to the imposition of that tax, there were large mortgage and 'investment companies transacting business in New Zealand. They were of considerable benefit to the inhabitants of this courtly. However, after the passing of the Act, those companies gradually withdrew, with ihe result that- the community is now Chiefly dependent upon the Banks for its financial re quiremeuts. It is,” he continued, “the principle of double taxation that is so strongly objected to by people outside the Dominion, notably in the United Kingdom As is well known, those people have to pay the tax on all money lent by them in the Dominion as well as income tax on their profits derived from their oversea investments, Represenations have been mad 6 from time to time to the Imperial Government to get these investments excluded from taxation, but so far without avail. It is for the reasons I have stated that I think it moat desirable for the New Zealand Parliament to take into consideration the representations now being made as to the desirableness of repealing the tax on mortgages and debentures.” \ •' . 1 ' ■'