GAS AND ELECTRICITY.

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 31, 7 February 1927, Page 4

GAS AND ELECTRICITY.

DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT. IS IT FAIR? ■STRONG PROTEST BY COMPANY DIRECTOR. I: has been a bono of contention ani'-njst dire, tors of cas companies that they arc placed a: a marked disadvantage in conire:;i:_' with their rival, electricity, for the p\:b!.c's custom. In most cases the electriel departments aie controlled by municipalities and as such, are exempt. likt "ther municipal undertakings, from taxation. This is the position in Auckland and the matter was dealt with at to-day's meeting of shareholders in the Auckland <ias Co. The chairman of directors. Mr. P H. Upton, referred to i; as rullows: When we met you twelve months a_ r o. I particularly i eferred to the differential treatment ot the gas industry in comison with power hoards: no change lias since taken place in the incidence of our taxation, so that our competitor is still exempt while we have to pay income tax. This is grossU unjust. <011e 01 the basicprinciples of taxation as laid down by Adam Smith, is "equality of treatment for all."' a principle accepted by all civilised countries: in our trade is seen the New Zealand application of that principle; it is distinctly antipodean. Taxation committees and associated chambers of commerce have recommended that this injustice should be redressed but it still remain?, and I may incidentally mention that, during the last five years, we have contributed the sum of £135.417 in income tax while the power boards have contributed nothing! Xor is this all. Power boards receive an indirect subsidy through the customs: most electrical plants being free, while gas plants, for exactly similar use. is subject to duty. Where electric appliances are not free, the duty levied is less than in the case of similar gas appliances. For instanc-e. electric cookers are subject to 20 per cent duty, while aas cookers have to pay 2.3 *~er cent. We have given "evidence before the tariff commission and hope that these anomalies will ere long be removed. How Long? • One may well ask how long? How long •will the 30.000 users of cookers and 4.1.0 1 x.i consumers in this city alone submit to this injustice—truly thev have the patience of -lob. I say nothing of shareholders' interests, for the reason that this company is rot out to increase the dividend. Our policy always has been to reduce the price whenever possible and accordingly it was reduced on four occasions since May, 1922, making a total reduction o-' 1/6 per. 10*30 cubic feet, which is equal to £90.000 per annum on our present output.