Tax Officer Replies To Taxi-owners’ Complaint

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31596, 6 February 1968, Page 14

Tax Officer Replies To Taxi-owners’ Complaint

Taxpayers had the right to object to an independent board of review about assessments made on income by the Inland Revenue Department, the Regional Controller (Mr R. H. Whiteside) said yesterday.

“In certain circumstances the objections can go to the Supreme Court,” he said. Mr Whiteside was replying to a statement by the president of the Canterbury branch of the Taxi Proprietors’ Federation (Mr J. M. Doody) in which he challenged the methods by which the department arrived at a taxi owner’s income.

Mr Whiteside said that during the bearing of an appeal against an assessment the methods used by the department and the results reached were very closely studied before a decision was given. “Dealing specifically with taxi-drivers, the department is

concerned with incomes and in the absence of adequate, accurate records it uses supplemental information, of which mileage is only one type, as a check for the purpose of ascertaining the correct gross income,” he said. No Recent Change

“There is no recent change in the method of assessment of taxi owners from the income methods used over the years. Mileage checks, also used where appropriate for years, have provided a starting basis in these cases in arriving at gross inconn.” Mr Whiteside said that all taxpayers carrying on business on their own account were required by law to keep for at least seven years sufficient records to enable their assessable income to be readily ascertained by the department. “One of the department’s tasks is that of verifying the correctness dr Otherwise of the incomes returned by taxpayers and this calls for the study of any supplementary information available and of a type appropriate to the class of taxpayer whose records are to be examined,” he said. “Where adequate and accurate records are held, checks of supplementary information are usually done quickly and. often without reference or inconvenience to the taxpayer or his representative.

“Where the records are inadequate for ascertaining the accuracy of the returned income, investivations can and must cover a variety of information.

“For obvious reasons, advance knowledge of the methods and type of the very wide range of supplementary information likely to be used if relevant in any taxpayer’s case would only forewarn the few who may try to understate their incomes. “Even if it were practical to nominate this information, such a policy would tie the hands of the investigating officers. “During all investigations taxpayers are invited to advance any unusual factors which, in their case, calls for adjustment and these are fairly considered, often by discussion with public accountants or solicitors before assessments are issued.

“Mr Doody is assured that any unusual factors known of advanced in any case which may be investigated will be given full consideration before assessments are issued. The objection procedures provide further guarantee of equitable treatment. “The Board of Review , has considered objections which concern the points to which Mr Doody adversely refers. “If Mr Doody cares to call on me, the District Commissioner, or the senior inspector in Christchurch, we will be happy to give him further information and to endeavour to allay his concern on the points he raises,” Mr Whiteside said.

Mr Doody said yesterday that up to November, 1966, taxi owners had been committed to a great deal of uneconomic running because of the extensive meter area in Christchurch.

“To places such as Sumner, Harewood and Hornby the return was only 9d a mile under the old fare schedule,” he said.