LAND VALUE TAXATION

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 21990, 14 January 1937, Page 4

LAND VALUE TAXATION

TO THE EDITOR OE TUB PRESS. Sir—l was pleased to see Mr T. E. Pearson state his views on the land tax in reply to Mr W. J. O’Regan, in your issue of January 8. I would also commend to the serious perusal and study by Mr O’Regan a booklet entitled “An Unequal Tax, a Land Tax Survev,” a series of articles published by “The Press” -nd other papers, prepared by Mr T. N. Gibbs, A.P.A., N Z.F.R., Econ. S., issued by the Christchurch Land Tax Committee and presented to the Hon. W. Nash on August 20. 1936. . ' While I cannot agree with Mr O’Regan that further increased land taxes will secure the right of everybody to the land of his country, I do agree with Mr Pearson when he says that the problem is how to keep the people on the land and the land in profitable occupation. For it is clearly evident beyond all doubt that there has set in an exodus from the land to the cities, which would now be much more apparent if prices of produce were at the 1932 level. Generally, people to-day are not land-minded, having little desire to invest in land, or work on it. Already, in comparison with many other countries, some who are our competitors for produce on the British markets, our land is not producing nearly up to its capacity, and why? . There are many reasons, some very important, seeing that the revenue of New Zealand is derived chiefly from the export of its products of the land. Seventeen and a half million has been devoted to public works, from which the revenue to be derived will not for a moment compare with the revenue from wool, butter, meat, fruit, etc., though I submit that these works have made it necessary to impose this graduated land tax. With the spending of this money on public works have gone many men who once were producers, and whose pay out of taxable revenue can be higher than from production returns plus rates and taxes. For the legislating of a graduated land tax, in some cases 6s an acre and others 9s an acre, prevents many from having the work done to keep buildings, fences, etc., in necessary repair, or producing to the capacity of their holdings, using the necessary amount of manures, etc., with costs of cultivation. For this tax, unlike income tax, takes no account of ability to pay. Three years ago this district was visited by a severe hail storm in January, which utterly destroyed 'hundreds of acres of wheat, oats, etc. Two years ago a severe drought was experienced. Last year a disastrous flood ruined many crops, with their owners. From this land with others legislation demands a graduated land tax. How, then, can more tax secure the right of everybod' to the land? ~ ‘ When in 1929 Sir Joseph brought down hu graduated lana tax*. it caused young men leaving school,, who would have gone home to the farm, to leave it for other avenues' where only income tax was demanded and not both, as on the land. Already the plain fact is that men do not want land either to work or for investment. The important dairy industry cannot attract labour, but is being carried on by the sweat and sorrow of mothers and their children in many districts, who have to go into the milking sheds to assist. Will these boys and girls who milk before and after a long journey to school stay on the farm, paying land and income tax? Is this com-munity-created value? It would seem the Government must either take over the land in a fair way as it did the Reserve Bank or remove the restrictions if it wants production to continue and conserve ■the revenue of the country. More taxation, as Mr O’Regan seems to advocate, would be a fallacy and bring production to a standstill, for while prices of produce have increased somewhat, costs have also soared. Britain has derated her farm lands and is giving a subsidy on wheat and cattle to foster production and protect herself after years of free trade and agricultural depression. The high standing of British pedigree stock is the result of farms being handed down from father to son, each generally considering it his mission in life to leave the farm producing more, the stock and buildings somewhat better than when it was handed to him. New Zealand will, I feel sure, miss her mission if we do not improve our exports in quality and quantity, turn the drift back to the country, and pay our debts with the revenue from these exports. Less taxation, not more, will only accomplish this. —Yours, etc., A. M. CARPENTER. Femside, January 11, 1937.