INDEPENDENT CRITIC

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 755, 30 August 1929, Page 7

INDEPENDENT CRITIC

MR. WILKINSON ASSAILS TAXATION BURDEN ON SMALL FARMER (THE SVX’S Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, Thursday. A truly independent attitude was taken up by Mr. C. A. Wilkinson (Egmont) in his Budget debate speech in the House of Representatives today. He criticised the Budget for its taxation proposals, and urged that more taxation should be placed on the big land owner. In spite of his strictures he claimed that the Budget was easy to understand, which was more than previous ones had been. First of all, lie said that he was not j perturbed over the deficit of £577,000,1 in view of the accumulated surpluses of the past amounting to two millions and a-half. He did not agree with the Prime Minister that post office surpluses should not be paid into the General Account. The post office last year had made a profit of over £900,000, and of this, true, £450,000 had been paid in interest, but there was no reason why the £523,000 remaining should not have been paid into the General Account. Where profits were made, the General Account should benefit. If the railways made a loss, the general taxpayer had to make up for that loss, but when the post office made a profit, the General Account did not benefit. Mr. E. J. Howard (Christchurch South): Hear, hear. It would cheapen the service. Mr. Wilkinson claimed that in trading departments the services should either be cheapened to the public or else the profit should be paid into the General Account. There was support for his argument in that it was proposed to use half the profits of the Public Trust. The post office paid no taxes, but the State guaranteed its Superannuation Fund. If it were to be a separate department let it be separate. Going on to the primage duty, Mr. Wilkinson said that he had worked it out that with the extra duty the Customs tax would be £SOO,OOO to £1,000,000 extra this year. He was against the imposition of the primage duty, as he considered that already too much revenue was raised by Customs taxation. In 1919 Customs taxation bad been responsible for 30 per cent, of the revenue. In 1928 it had been responsible for 52 per cent. “Jn times of stress,” said Mr. Wilkinson, “Customs revenue has a habit of shrinking quickly, and that may let us down one day.” Also, he continued, the farmer and the worker had to pay too much through the tax. By farmers he meant small men. The small man was a worker who had no chance of passing on the tax. The wealthy class of farmer yvas not paying enough in taxation. He agreed that tariffs helped New Zealand industry, but the primage duty would not help industry at all. There was no possibility of escaping the consequences of the tax—the costs were passed on to the whole community. (Hear, hear.) The Minister of Defence, the Hon. T. M. Wilford: You’re speaking as a wholesaler. Mr. Wilkinson: I am speaking as both. I am a wholesaler and a retailer. AT WITS’ END He continued that the primage duty was an old tax, and he first remembered its imposition in the early 90’s in the days of the Atkinson Government. Then the Government was at its wits’ end for money. It was regarded as a tax for times of emergency. It had been imposed during the war, and New Zealand had not been without it since. Now it was proposed to double it. He wanted an assurance from the Frime Minister that it would not be imposed for longer than the end of this financial year. Regarding mortgage exemption reduction, Mr. Wilkinson said that the Prime Minister had claimed that he did not want to hurt the small farmer in imposing the tax, but nevertheless the tax would have a serious effect on the small man with land of high value. The proposal would be harmful not only to the farmer but to the United Party. Mr. J. A. Nash (Palmerston North), amid Reform laughter: Oh! So that’s j wheee you’ve come to. Mr. Wilkinson said that the United Party owed its position to the favour of the small farmer, and most of the private members of the United Party were against the imposition of the tax. MORTGAGE EXEMPTION He was wondering whether the mortgage exemption reduction applied to faYm lands only. The Budget was not clear on that point, and he would like the Prime Minister to make a statement as. to whether it applied to town lands is well. The House was against the principle of taxing a man on his debts. Where mortgages prevailed, the Government proposed to tax liabilities instead of assets. Rather should the mortgagor be taxed. The proposals discouraged men from going on the land, and he quoted figures to prove that the taxation, added to local body taxation, would he too much for the ordinary farmer to bear. What was the Minister of Education going to say about agricultural bias then? Faced with the figures, his senior scholars asked if they would go on the land, would say, “No, thank you: we’re not having any.” He went on to say that about two- | thirds of the 7,162 farmers in New Zealand with land over £5,000 unimproved value would be affected by the tax. He asked for a flexible tax to be paid if a man were making a profit, and entered a plea for the classification of lands.