STATE' TAXATION

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 364, 19 February 1937, Page 3

STATE' TAXATION

AVERAGE OF £76

Contribution By New Zealand Families.

Most taxpayers are fully aware I that the usual figures relating to the > amount of taxation paid per head of New Zealand’s population are not I effective as an index to the real i amount paid by each individual (says ; a statement by the Associated Chambers of Commerce of New Zealand). It is obvious that figures of national taxation, when expressing it as an amount per head of the whole population, must inevitably take in men, women and children, the wagcI earner, but also his dependants; the employed, but also the unemployed, j I the pensioners, the infirm, the prison population,l and those either too | young or too old to be breadv'inners. | For that reason, many people are well aware that they are actually paying, in direct and indirect taxation, considerably more than the estimated amount of £l9/3/- taxation [ per head of population for the cur- i rent financial year. The taxpayer | consequently makes some conjectures ! as to the real amount of taxation he j pays, directly and indirectly. It. is, of course, impossible to get very far along this line. It is easy enough to sort out the fact that out of the whole Dominion’s population only 64,000 (1934-35 figures) pay income-tax, but then everybody paiys indirect taxes—which produce by far the greatest revenue. However, it is a step nearer to express total national taxation in termq of the con-■ tributiony made by the average I family of four persons. The follow- ' ing table, over the whole population, and covering a period of years, is drawn up on that basis: r Taxation Per Family.

Naturally, these figures are ' average; one family will pay more and another less 1 . Certain of the taxation is direct and certain indirect. To the figures in the above'table are to be added local body taxation, which was equivalent to £l5/11/- pei* average family in 1934-35. The reason for the considerable increases in national taxation is of course increased Government expenditure, which, for the current financial year, is equivalent t.o £lO5/15/- per average family. In other words, national expenditure (from ordinary revenue and loan money) is now at the rate of over £2 per family per week. A prominent State official recently contended, in an address, that high expenditure and high, taxation created various social benefits through the redistribution of income which they effected, but taxation which reaches' an average of £76 per family is indefensible. It has become uneconomic and unjust.

Y ear. Amount. 1929-30 . . .. £52 14 3 1930-31 .... £50 8 4 1931-32 . . . . £45 17 10 1932-33 . . . £51 10 10 1933-34 .. .. £55 14 3 1934-35 . . . - . £63 14 3 | 1935-36 ... £65 3 1 1936-37 ... £76 16 4* ; *Estimated. 1