The Press. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1890.

Press, Volume XLVIL, Issue 7716, 22 November 1890, Page 4

The Press. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1890.

The cry of the Radicals ia that the property tax kills enterprise and drives capital irom the country, t On the? other hand, we are given to under-; stand that 9. land and income tax' -would not be open to any such accusation. This is the view put forward by the more moderate sectipav of thai party. The advanced members of thst party do not < iro*ub£e| j &emselves even to; make any attempt to prove that their proposals would be less harmful than the existing forms of direct taxation. They announce boldly that the, Radicals Tfave a great mission po perform. They have come into existence for the express purpose of working a great: revolution in our social'arrangements,: and they are not at all frightened at the probable consequences, 'of their revolutionary schemes. If we are to have a land and income tax combined levied on an equitable basis the matter in dispute between the defenders of the property tax and the advocates of the land and income tax is only one of" minor importances There would be some variation in the inpideuco of the taxes, were the ! change made. Aβ far as can be made out, however, there is a great difference of opinion as to how the proposed new taxation should be imposed. If we are' to have a land tax, such as was imposed in 1878 by Sir Geobge Grey's Government, then ie ia plain a gross injustice will be inflicted on the farmers. That impost taxed land, minus its improvements, without any reference to the burdens upon it. A farmer-with a mortgage; paid as muoh as a man who had ; none. 1n...,-, other words, the land was taxed irrespective of the liabilities upon it. The cruel injustice of suob a method of; taxation came home to nearly the whole; .country. The people only stood it for a very short time, and the new House next eleojted drove Sir Gbqrgb Grey's Government from power largely in consequence of the land tax. , " 5 - On the other hand, if the land-owner is to be allowed to deduct not only improvements but liabilities,-the tar %ill not be one upon land, but upon property, or at any rate one particular form of it. If, in addition, we are to have an income tax on all incomes not derived from land, the result, we say, will be the property tax levied in a different and far more disagreeable form. . We have no deaire to naiereptesent the supporters of a land and income tax, but, as far as we can gather, those who have any theoretical views on the subject, do mean to insist on the imposition of a land tax as thao tax is generally understood; namely, either an acreage tax or one on value. In other words, that the land will be called on to pay the tax quite irreI apeotive of the burdens upon it. Added to this, there is to be ant income tax upon all incomes from whatever source derived. The land will, under such a system, be taxed as land, and there will also be a tax upon the income from the land. We are aware that some of the advocates of the new system deny that this is the case, but we have the assurance of the present Premier that he has enquired carefully from land-tax men and income-tax men, and the majority told him that the land shall be |axed as/land, and thai) another tax ia to be , put upon the; income derived from, the land. We need scarcely point Out that suoh a] policy would be disastrous to the country settlers. The only effect of such a polioy would be drive the half of them from their homes and] land them in the Bankruptcy Court. On the other hand, if we! are to have a combined land and income tax which will only touch every man once and in an'equitable manner, what ia to be gained by the change! If we are to obtain the same revenue as we now get, the new tax will be just as injurious .to the colony as the existing tax* ; tn addition, it will L be far more harrassing and annoying to the people. Fancy every person in the community who is not drawing a fixed salary, and who makes his income from investments, speculations, nod in trade, being compelled to expose nic business to the income tax department. The returns demanded under tae property tax are irksome enough, but the annoyance would be ten times greater were an income tax in force. Even Sir BdiJßtx Stout, m we pointed out the other day, advanced Badical as he is, reeognJiea the utter folly of wantonly changing the incidence of taction under exiitiag cirouraataEce?, If,Jon the other iand, it is intended that under the land tax heavier burdens are to be placed upon the land, then the sooner febia is clearly recognised the better. Sir Bobbkt Stouv again tella ' nic £oUowera that to get from a land tax what Is now got from a general property tax would be to impose busdeaa on land so high I

moat So.-lMt we have been disqugaiag only the proposed change in taxation, advocated by the more rat« -Eadisfth. Bui there is an advanced section, and the section wbioh may oodtrol the wha will be satisfied with do half .measures In their eyes are fit subjects of pablio pludder. They desire to ice a>? land tax pure and imposed. Some of these persone talk of getting half a million, and it has even been suggested that a millioa oould eaaly be raised from such a source. We are quite aware that it is quite useless arguing with such persons. , We call attention to these proposals here, with the sole object of warning sober-minded electors that it will be a fatal mistake on their-part if they take matters easily. They most be 'up and doing and determine that the new House presence of representatives who openly advoottte ■ downright coofiscatioit