TAXATION OF MOTORS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 194, 17 August 1922, Page 4

TAXATION OF MOTORS.

Motorists, having agreed to a tax on tyres, are alarmed lest additional heavy taxation should be imposed on them through the license fee, and the Auckland Automobile Association last evening endorsed the decision of the parent body in favour of a flat ear tax not exceeding £2. Last year's Motor Vehicles ISill provided a license tax ranging from £3 U> £10, with £5 for ordinary private motor ears, and it is estimated that on an average the tyre tax amounts to £."> per car \wr annum. The average private motorist, therefore, would pay £10 a year in taxation if last year's bill went through, in addition to what he paid in Customs duties when he bought his car. Under the proposed. rate of £2 he would pay £7, which, according to an article written by a prominent Auckland motorist, would he "more than double the charges in America and Victoria, countries which are better for comparison with the Dominion than the older countries of Britain and France, where the present, high rates are really part of the taxation to meet heavy war loans! and to repair the abnormal traffic | ciuiscj by the war itself.' . According to recent figures for 14 American States, the license fees for a 2;">-horse-po\Vcr passenger car vary from sdol to 34d01. California charges lOdol, Connecticut IS, Idaho i>o, and Oregon I! 4. I'nder the uniform law proposed by the automobile industry, the tax would be a little less thai) 15dol. The American motorist, however, buys his tyres more cheaply than the New Zealander, the difference ljcing probably substantially more than the New Zealand Customs duty. It would seem, therrfore. that the American private motorist is substantially better off in the matter of taxation than the New Zealand motorist would be under last year's bill if the proposal of the Automobile I'nion was adopted. The private ear. however, is only part of the problem formed by motor vehicles and roads. There is the' commercial car in all its varieties, the heavier of which are very severe on ordinary roads, and will in' time disintegrate concrete. It may be doubtful whether the amount the private motorist is willing to pay is suffleient, in view of what he is going to get in the way of better surfaces. but it is also doubtful whether the lorry owner is not boinc too lijrhtly treated. The Minister of Public Works, in liis memorandum to Ihe recent Highway? Conference, says that on a basis of £.T for :i private car and £10 for a lorry, it is estimated that £l. r ,O.on<l will be available in license fees. Let us see how America treats the commercial car. Taxes in the fourteen States referred to , above vary greatly. Arizona, for example, imposes from ten dollars for n one-ton truck to twenty-five for a fivo-ton. hut , in Connecticut'the taxation mrs up t'i ninety and one hundred and eidity s.-ven i!<>l!;!rs. in Texns tn eishty and one hundred 'md twenty, nnd in Maryland tn one hundred and one hundred and fifty. Maryland has a scientific system well worthy of study. The State, having spent twenty-six millions of borrowed money in poii«triretinßt n fine system of highways, decided that users must pay, and that as the heaviest vehicles did the most amount of damage, they must pay the highest license fees. The ordinary car used for private purposes pays sixty cents per horse power, which fee is doubled if the vehicle is used commercially. The fees for solid-tyre tru-ks -were fixed at twenty dollars a ton up to three tons, rising to thirty dollars a ton over that level, so that six and seven ton trucks pay three hundred and five hundred dollars. # Maryland, however, no longer licenses new trucks larger than five tons. Last year private cars in that State averaged in fees twelve dollars and commercial cars thirty-three dollars. Owners of commercial motors, as well as motorists, must accept the cer-

■ iiintv that they cannot have good roads ithout contributing towards their cost, and they must realise that hitherto they have done a great deal of damage and paid very little to make it good. The Minister makes it clear that double taxation of motor vehicles is an essential part of his scheme, which means that if interested parties oppose his taxation proposals too strongly they may help to wreck the whole of his roads policy.