RURAL HARDSHIP

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 828, 23 November 1929, Page 10

RURAL HARDSHIP

SUPER-TAX ON LAND APPEAL COMMITTEE APPOINTED MR. W. G. RIDDELL TO BE CHAIRMAN special to THE SUE WELL!NGTOX, Today. The personnel of the committee to hear the appeals of farmers under the new scheme of land tax has now been finalised. The tribunal will consist of an ex-magistrate, Mr. W. G. Riddell, and two retired commissioners of taxation. Messrs. D. G. Clark and A. E. Fowler. TT was provided in tlio legislation -*• passed last session that two members ot the committee should be appointed by tho Government, and the third by the Farmers’ Union and the New Zealand Sheep Owners’ Federation. Mr. Riddell, who will be chairman. and Mr. Clark are the Government nominees, and Mr. Fowler has been appointed on behalf of the farming organisations. This committee will hear all appeals for exemption from the levy described as the supertax. Certain “hardship" exemptions according to burden of mortgages are provided for, and it is expected that some of the evidence of individual financial arrangements tendered before the committee will 330 of a complex nature. Tho members of the tribunal are highly qualified men. Mr. Riddell, who was born in Otago in 1865, holds the degree of Master of Arts, and for some time was a lecturer in jurisprudence at Otago University. Later he became a stipendiary magistrate at \\ ellington, and has been noted for the soundness of his judgments. Mr. Clark became Commissioner of Land and Income Tax in 1914, after thirty years’ service with the department, and his administration gave general satisfaction to the business community. On bis retirement, Mr. Fowler succeeded him. Both are therefore well-versed fti the departmental workings of taxation schemes. The present Commissioner of Land and. Income Tax© is Mr. E. J. R. Gumming.

FARMERS SHOULD LODGE OBJECTIONS PROVISION FOR RELIEF ‘‘Farmers who under the special land tax will suffer hardship on any fair and reasonable grounds whatsoever should immediately make application to the Commissioner of Taxes to have their cases stated and heard before the commission to be appointed.” This advice is given by Mr. David Jones, Parliamentary representative for Mid-Canterbury, in a letter to The Sun. Mr. Jones also reminds farmers that according to the statement made by the Minister, the Hon. G. W. Forbes, objection must be lodg€*d within the 21 days allowed for payment of the ordinary land tax. “The recent Land and Income Tax Amendment Bill when introduced had a hardship clause which, in the opinion of the Reform Party, was of no value, and when we vigorously denounced it, the Prime Minister stated that an objector would have a remedy in that he could petition Parliament, which would be about as useful as a vote of sympathy to a starving man,” writes Mr. Jones. “The hardship clause which was ultimately conceded to the Opposition is very wide and comprehensive and administered in the spirit of the clause, and with the undertakings given by the lion. G. W. Forbes, who was in charge of the Bill, will give substantial relief in a very large number of <?hses where financial ruin would have followed if the clause had not been amended, and relief in many other cases where serious injustice would have been inflicted.

“The hardship clause (3) now reads: (3.) Tho G o ver nor - G eneral- in- - may appoint a commission under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 190 S, to inquire and report as to any cases of hardship that may arise from tho imposition of special land tax in accordance with the last preceding section. (2) If in any such case the commission appointed as aforesaid reports that in its opinion, the payment of special land tax has entailed, or would, on any fair and reasonable grounds whatsoever entail serious hardship to the taxpayer, the Commissioner of Taxes may, in accordance with the report of the said commission, and without further authority than this section, refund the whole or any part of the special land tax so paid or release the taxpayer wholly or in part from his liability to pay such special land tax.

“Mr. Coates pressed the Minister to lay down specifically what constitutes hardship, but Mr. Forbes said be did not desire the clause surrounded by limitations which might prevent him from doing what is fair and reasonable, and further stated that he would deal generously under the hardship clause with every class likely to suffer hardship in connection with this matter. UNFAIR AND WRONG “Mr. Coates, in Hansard 31, page 536, says: "When the Bill was in committee the Minister intimated that if land was not suitable for subdivision then such should be a consideration for hardship. “Mr. Coates further stated, ‘I shall now quote from notes made when the Minister was speaking in regard to this question. He said that when land was mortgaged and the mortgagee was being affected by the supertax and his equity was being destroyed thereby, it was unfair and wrong, and that it was his intention that sub-clause 2 of clause 3 should apply in such cases. This was accepted by him as a reason and the Commission may consider such occurrences in determining hardship.’ “Hon. Mr. Forbes: I said that the Commission would inquire into and report upon such cases, j “Rt. Hon. Mr. Coates: And grant i exemptions? “Hon. Mr. Forbes: They have a i free hand- in this respect. “Mr. Coates further stated: ‘The Minister said that in the case of part- | nership in such cases where hardships j were being created, be was prepared to i allow that to be a matter to go before the Commission for the purpose of | making that a recommendation.’ j “Mr. Coates then referred to other ; cases of hardship that were men- • tioned. but I cannot trespass further | on your space with them, but I would ! like to conclude with the following important statement made by the Leader of the Opposition as his summing-up of the agreement made between him and the Acting-Leader of the House, Mr. Forbes, and which statement Mr. Forbes accepted without demur. “The lion, gentleman said he did not wish to have the hands of the ComI mission tied in any way, or interfere with the scope of its inquiries; neither did be want to see its usefulness cur--1 tailed when dealing with cases of hardship. From these remarks, I take ; it that the Minister really means that } the Commission should take the widest j scope in dealing with cases of hardj ship—not only to those to which T j have referred, but to others as well.”