TAXATION CUTS.

Taranaki Daily News, 14 October 1922, Page 5

TAXATION CUTS.

REPEAL OF THE SUPER-TAX. THE CONCESSION DISCUSSED. I BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE. By Telegraph.—Press Association. 0 Wellington, Last Night. - The House went into committee to-day d on the Land and Income Tax Bill. ! ‘ Mr. R. McCallum (Wairau) said the 9 number of people who would benefit by e the repeal of the super tax was -small, 3 and he asked whether the Premier was s wise in making this concession at a e time when he was so much in need of ' money. Mr. H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labor Party) said the Labor Party was ' against the repeal of the super tax, i which was really a concession to big • landed estates. If the House could vote • on the issue freely he had no doubt it 3 would say the concessions should apply only to small men. I Mr. Massey claimed that the concesj sions would not benefit any particular , class, but would -benefit the whole com- ) inanity. Nearly a million of money . was being given -back to the people, and • rightly so, because no country could ; prosper if too heavily taxed. Over a hundred thousand people would benefit i directly -by the remission of taxation, , but it would go far beyond; it would i assist the whole community. Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) contended it was not the users, but the holders of land -who would benefit by the concession. Afte/ further discussion, Mr. Holland moved to amend clause two in the direction of limiting the remission of taxation to taxpayers whose taxable balance of rural lands does not exceed £lO,OOO. On a division the amendment was rejected was 51 votes to 13. Mr. McCallum then moved that the remission should not apply to estates of over £20,000 in value. On a division the amendment was lost -by 42 votes to 21 The clause was then passed. At clause five, providing for the remission of the super income tax, Mr Holland again protested that the concession would mean nothing to the small taxpayers, (but to men and companies with big incomes it would mean a gift of hundreds of thousands of pounds. Mr. Holland called for a division on clause five, specifying the rates of income tax to be levied. The clause was retained by 42 votes to 7. On clause twelve, reducing income tax on foreign insurance companies from ten to five per cent., Mr. T. K. Sidey (Dunedin -South) complained that it was placing local companies at a disadvantage. The Prime Minister replied that if the concession was not granted a great lose would accrue to New Zealand, as re-insurance business would simply be arranged in London. Mr. T. M. Wilford (Leader of the Opposition) urged that there should not be such a disparity ’between the reduction in income tax imposed on foreign ‘ , insurance companies and that on other ; ' companies. I < Mr. D. Jones (Kaiapoi) pointed out | - that the high tax on foreign companies ! 1 simply meant higher rates of insurance, i ’ He would urge, however, that the con- .' . cession -should not apply to insurance j contracts already made on the current . season’s produce. -j The Prime Minister said he was not fully satisfied with the clause, and s would like to look further into the ( matter. • The clause was passed unamended, * On clause fourteen (special provision ■ as to a business carried on by a hus- j band and wife), Mr. Wilford drew at- 1 x tention to the many Chinese partner- I ships which were making large profits 1 and paying little. if any, income tax. ' The Prime Minister said he would in- J quire into the matter, and progress was c reported. t