EXHIBITION EXHIBITORS' PROFITS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 59, 5 April 1907, Page 2

EXHIBITION EXHIBITORS' PROFITS.

ORJECI'IONS TO PAY INCOME TAX. THE DEPARTMENT'S ATTITUDE. Per Press Association. Wellington, April i. Interviewed by a Times reporter today with reference to the Christchurch exhibitors' objections to pay income tax on profits made, Mr. P. Heys, Commissioner of Taxes, explained that the law . |>rovi:led that every person who started business in the State must pay a deposit to the Customs as a guarantee thnt he would make a return of the income derived from the business. There was no question in regard to the law governing the exhibitors' liability, though the exhibitors considered that they had some special claim for privilege in this matter. He did Bay when the, Exhibition was opened that he would not claim tax upon any indenting done from samples shown at the Exhibition, but it was not here where, the complaint lay. It had to lie remembered that there were many associations and others who ran shops at tho Exhibition making great prolit on the sa)c of their goods. The income thus derived wag from business done in the State, and was clearly taxable. For instance, theatrical companies doing business in New Zealand were taxed on their income, and why not "Wonderland," "Tho Pike," and the other side-shows at the Exhibition? There was never any difficulty with the > permanent theatrical companies periodically visiting and touring this country. They all'paid the tax on their profits. These companies had visited New Zen- ; laud during (lie Exhibition, ngniflA . which they had to compete, yet they hiiif I to pay the tax all the same, and tho [ law did not have any exception in the present instance. He failed to sec where . the "sharp practice" came, in, as alleged , by the South Australian Commissioner, . seeing that Christchurch shopkeepers, , who paid income tax, were in competiI (ion with the Exhibition shopkeepers, . who claimed exemption, mid, moreover, , it must he remembered that where a man's business resulted in a loss, his deI posit for income tax was returned in I full, and if the business showed a i snialhr prolit than the amount of the deposit, the balance was returned. No • deposit or (ax had been collected from sample exhibitors at Christchurch, M to the attitude of the Department in ths matter, there was, added tho Commissioner, no authority for waiving tho collection of the tax, which was being collected under the Statute law.