Wages and taxes

Press, 2 June 1981, Page 20

Wages and taxes

Sir,—Mr Muldoon and his Parliamentary colleagues have made sure their salaries are further boosted with the 5 per cent cost-of-living increase granted this month by the Arbitration Court. It has been dubbed a “living costs catch-up adjustment”: the Prime Minister would have us believe that this increase — which is relative to what one actually earns or receives by way of regular income — should be a substitute in effect for wage and other primary income increases for the worker and others who qualify for this socalled cost-inflation adjustment. But just how equitable ahd helpful to the low-income sectors will this increase, after tax, be? It is little wonder Mr Muldoon has attempted to resort to his now all-too-familiar diversionary tactics over the

economy’s shambles. His cost-of-living increase alone, $65, is more than my weekly (adult) income of $54 after tax.— Yours, etc., KENNETH TAIT. May 31, 1981.

Sir,—On the front page i May 26) under “Wage freeze until Budget,” the Prime Minister, Mr Muldoon, confirmed this yesterday after the 5 per cent general Wage Order decision of the Court of Arbitration, and further in the article a figure of 9 per cent to equal the 14 per cent consumer price index for the June quarter. On page 3 under “Wage control rejected,” because of the Court order, Mr Muldoon said the Government would be looking for a wage round with a six-6.5 per cent increase. During the week-end of May 16, the “big deal” was a wage tax trade-off, plus a comment: “Even old Jim Knox, who takes a fair while to get an idea into his head, realises.” Whose idea, and whose head are we dealing with now? Under “Pensioners to miss G.W.O. this year,” — it gels even worse.—Yours, etc., R. W. H. WADE. May 27, 1981.