Untitled

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 2917, 26 March 1891, Page 2

The Hon. Mr Seddon informed his hearers on Monday night at Nelson that" there would bo nothing revolutionary, confiscatory, or of fireworks in the policy of the Ministry." The peep however, which he has afforded us Tjohind the ministerial curtain belios the statement to a vory considerable extent. Tho Property-tax is to bo swept away, and in its place a Land-tax is to be imposed. There is no mention of the Income-tax to supplement the revenue thus derivable, but we are informed that tho tax ou land will be of such a nature that " it will not injure the small settler, but will compel ownors of large estates to improve or sell." It has been admitted on all hands that unless a Land-tax was of such weight as to seriously hamper, if not crush tho occupiers, it would uot yield a sufficient BUtn to enable interest on loans to be paid. Even Sir G. Grey admitted this. The small holders are to be comparatively easily dealt with—they have the bulk of tho voting power—it necessarily follows thereforo that the proposed tax will be on a sliding scale —the greater the amount of laud held the higher will be the tax iu proportion to value. In other words its imposition will be tho iuu.ugura.tion of which has been euphoniously termed a "burstup policy." Wo are justified iu this presumption because Mr 13ullauce during tho Into electoral campaign distinctly pointed to a Landtax ou a sliding scale as tho coriect policy to pursue. This meaus a class-tax, and this iu any form has been condemned by experience and by every writer of weight ou political economy, We have uo sympathy whatever with the man who has purchased laud with the deliberate intention of waiting for his reward till tho advance of settlement shall enable him to sell at a handsome profit, notwithstanding loss of interest on capital. The advocates of a Lund-tax are mostly so with the object of getting at these largo speculative holders. They forget, however, that the system has been largely pursued ou a small scale, we mean as regards the quantity of laud bought. These holders under the sliding scale will go comparatively free, or perhaps not be touched at all. It is to bo hoped that if Parliament changes the incidonce of taxation it will avoid imposing a class-tax, if a Land-tax bo onacted at all it should be universal, and of equal weight. The small holder who utilises his land would not feel inordinately a moderate tax on the initial Talue of his lands, whereas tho same tax would soon convince tho speculator that his investmout must bear fruit immediately or not at all. On the othor hand, the small holder, if he supports the principle of a Laud-tax, eveu iu the less objectionable shape wo have pointed out, must not forget that he is deliberately taking upon himself a burdeu iu addition to those he is already groaning under. There is no proposal h» reduce Customs duties on necessaries, ho would pay them as now- The strongest argument agaiust the Property-tax is that it directly taxes the result of a man's energies aud enterprise, and this unquestionably is au evil, but the energies of a people must bo blunted no matter what the form of taxation. If a given amount is taken from a population, the energies of that population are neutralized in exact proportion to the amount leviod. There is no getting over the fact that the proposal sketched in outline by Mr Seddon is, by his own admission, confiscatory iu its tendencies, if it esoapes the chajge of savouring of revolution and fireworks.