Compulsory Subscription to War Loans,

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16216, 20 May 1918, Page 6

Compulsory Subscription to War Loans,

IThe letter from a correspondent in another column asking for further information in regard to compulsory contribution to War Loans, shows that the position is not yet fully understood by those affected. In answer to our correspondent we may repeat the information given in our previous article, that all tho exemptions in the Act of 1917 are now abolished, and the present Act provides that ''If the Commissioner of "Taxes has reason to bcliovo that any "person has not subscribed in due pro- " portion to his means to the loan " authorised to bo raised" he may call /upon that person to subscribe to that loan. "Any person" in tho Act, however, obviously means any taxpayer, since tho amount which he is called upon to subscribe is based upon the land and iueonic-tax paid, and is not to exceed six times the yearly average of tho land tax, and incftmc-tax paid or payable by him for the three yeare ended on March 31st, 1918. Our correspondent refers to possible cases of hardship which woidd result from a rigid enforcement of tho compulsory powers. There are cases, he points out, where men are fyorking almost entirely on borrowed capital, and under the presont Act the land tax is computed upon the unimproved value, including all borrowed money. He mentions an instance where the land tax was £24, but is now £116, and he suggests that in such, a case tho compulsory subscription to tho loan would become a real hardship. We believe thero aro many cases, not confined to owners of land, where tho strict enforcement of the compulsory powers would involve not only hardship, but positive ruin. It will be observed, however, that notices are to be sent only in cases "where the " Commissioner has reason to believe "that any person has not subscribed "in proportion to his means." Fortunately the present Commissioner has the reputation of using his powers with caro and consideration, and we do not think ho would take an unreasonable view of any case in which tho facts were placed before him. If, however, the taxpayer is not satisfied with his ho has the right of appeal to a judge of-tho Supreme Court sitting in Chambers.

It lias boon stated that where some contribution has been made to the loan ami it appears to the -Commissioner insufficient, he -will write to the taxpayer before issuing a formal notice, so that if it should appear tho taxpayer may fairly bo called upon to make a further contribution, ho may do so without being subject to the penal rate of interest. Where a taxpayer feels that he cannot afford to make any contribution to the loan, it would perhaps bo well for him to \Vrito to tho Commissioner, laying before him tho full circumstances of tho case. This would give him an opportunity, if tho Commissioner still thought h? should contribute, of doing so and getting tho full rate of interest. If he still thought tho Commissioner j was wrong, ho could, if he preferred it, take his chances of an. appeal. We think the Act was badly drawn, and far too hastily rushed through tho House, and that far too much is left to tho discretion of the Commissioner. The redeeming feature is that at present we have a Commissioner in whom the public has eonfidcnco.