COMPANY TAXATION.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 107, 7 May 1924, Page 4

COMPANY TAXATION.

It is a weakness of tlie Taxation | n Commission that it includes no trained economist. The next best tninfr is to ,[ get the evidence of economists, and one p of them. E'roiessor Condlitre. ot Canter- I? bury College, gave his views on Monday, i ( , His valuable evidence raises a point on i, which there is perhaps sonic tnisundei- . " standing. He is opposed to the present * By stem of comjiany taxation, hut lie ~ thinks that ii company, as an entity h possessing.' certain privilege*, should pay rt something to the State in taxes. Most j if not all of those who wouul crianpe ! the present inequitable system are quite s in favour of companies paying a certain i amount of taxation. They would not "' oppose n comparatively low fiat rate of ' taxation, which would lie combined with ~ taxation of shareholders on their in - comes. Professor Condliffe points Io the N injustice of the present syeteni when he says it is based on a false analogy L between the ability of an individual and <■' the ability of a Ic};al entity to pay ?' taxation. Where. ]ierliaps. the system is M mnsf. unfair is its ipioritifr ot ihc rcla- « tion between profits and capital. A coin ;' puny is called upon to pas taxes on its | profits whether those profits represent !'' a larjre or nn insigiiiticant return on i . cajiital. An individual, on the other j t hand., can *o arrange his investments ; r as to pay nothing on tlie return that |'' his capital brings. The Commission is j v af least doing this much good, thai it is , > eliciting interesting evi(len<-e and draw- '•' ing fresh attention to the unfair and r unscientific lines on which our taxation ] is drawn up.