The Taxation of Machinery. INDIGNANT RATEPAYERS. DEPUTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL

Evening Post, Volume LI, Issue 62, 13 March 1896, Page 4

The Taxation of Machinery . INDIGNANT RATEPAYERS. DEPUTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL

There ia great agitation in certain oirolea in the city just now on account of the City Corporation plaoing what is considered to be a tax upon maohinery. Last even hip Messrs. S. Brown (President), W. Chalmers, Hatohen, Cable', Luke, Crabtree, Soonllar, Crease, Bisß, Dimook, and Ho well, of the Wellington Industrial Association, waited upon the City Council in connection with the matter, and entered a vigorous protest against any such taxation being imposed. Mr. S. Brown explained the objects of the visit of the deputation, and went on to add that it was most iniquitous to tax anything that was for the advancement of the oity, and that was what was being done by this maohinery tax. The taxation of maohinery, especially in a place like Wellington, meant also taxation of wages, and at the present time employers were already at their wits' end to carry on without cutting down wages. He did not know whether the proposed taxation was legal or not, but in any oaao he would ask the Mayor and Council to suspend operation of the tax while steps were taken to get the law altered. The Industrial Association'was a large and influential body, and he had no doubt that under the oiroumstances they would be able to get an alteration of the law. Mr. Chalmers said a tax upon machinery would be a great deterrent to* the industries of the town, and would be a very great drawback to manufacturers who had to compete with firms outside Wellington. Tt would be very unwise on the part of the Counoil, he thought, if they insisted upon collecting this tax. It was a class tax, and he considered it very unjust and very bard. Mr. Hatohen pointed out that » great many people depended upon machinery to get a living, and the Council would have to take -upon itself the onus of the reduction of wages that wonld follow the taxation of maohinery. His firm, for instance, had been taxed £50 more this year than last, and yet thoj- had done nothing to increase the value of their property, Their neighbours' taxation, on the other hand, had not been inoreased. If the tax was to be taken, it should be a fair and » just one to everybody, anl not made to preßa on some while others esaaped it. Everyone looking at the matter in a fair and impartial planner wonld see that the tax was a moat unjust one. Mr. Cable protested against the tax as an iniquitous one. He, without doing anything to his premises, had been taxed .£IOO extra this year, and he understood that he was the only one in his particular trade _ who had had anything pnt on. He objected to being singled out in this way, and considered it unfair and unjust. If the law allowed maohinery to be taxed so much the worse for the law. Why, if machinery was taxed, were not the merchants' goods also taxed P Owing to the scarcity of ground at Wellington, manufacturers were already handicapped by the heavy taxation, and this city could never become a manufacturing centre if this maohinery tax, whioh was a class tax, was now to be added. Be had intended alterations at hid foundry, but when be got his rating paper he stopped these. Mr. Halley objected to thia tax being put upon a workman's tools, and Mr. Luke and other members of the deputation also condemned it. Councillor Barber — Is this a pnrely local tax, or will it apply to the whole colony ? Mr. Brown — I understand that this is the first city to have the meanness to tax its industries, and those trying to work them up. Councillor Harris -I never heard anything of thin. Councillor Barber— Neither did I. Mr. Brown pointed out that the Harbour Board had aoted in a manner entirely different from the City Council . The Board had gone to an expenditure of eomo £5000 — the cost of its large crane, which was erected chiefly for the use of the foundries here. The Mayor said he must say that when he first saw one of the valuation papers it took him very much by surprise. He had tried to get at the root of the matter to see if it was justified, and although he could not express his feelings as strongly as Mr. Brown had done, he must Bay that he endorsed every word he had uttered on this matter. It was a taxation, he thought, that should not have been attempted by a local body, but by the Legislature. He had always extended every consideration to the industries of the colony, and the basis of these industries was machinery. He was very much surprised, and not a little grieved, that a tax of this kind Bhould emanate from the Wellington City Council f Councillor Barber— Does it emanate from the Wellington City Counoil F I am ignorant of it. The Mayor begged the pardon of the Counoil. It may have taken members of the Counoil as much by surprise as it did himself. Councillor Devine — Was no instruction given to the City Valuer ? Councillor Tanner— Has any member of the deputation any of the rating papers P Mr. Chalmers (grimly)— My paper ia in the hands of Mesers. Brandon, Hislop, and Brandon. Councillor Harris hoped the Mayor would point ont that the taxation of machinery did not emanate from the City Counoil. Nothing of the kind had ever been before the Council P The Mayor — lhat is bo. The City Solicitor, in response to the invitation of the Mayor, explained the position. This, he stated, was. not a new qnestion. It had been argued in the Assessment Court year after year for the past eight or ten years, and successive Besident Magistrates had decided in favour of the Corporation. It was quite incorrect to say that it was a tar upon machinery as machinery. The machinery on the premises improved the annual value of the property, and had always been taxed. The difference this year was that instead of taxing the property as a whole it was now specially stated that machinery had been taken into account in fixing the annual value. The case brought against the New Zealand Electrical Syndicate here last year settled the question definitely. Mr. Martin, S.M., in giving judgment for the Corporation in that case, distinctly pointed out that it was not the machinery that was beins taxed, but the whole property as a going concern. It was no new tax. Mr. Brown thought Mr. Martin was not dealing with the matter now being brought under the notice of the Council. If, as stated by Mr. Martin, the tax on maohinery was now the law, they must amend the law. He asked the Council to suspend the opeiation of the tax until they could get the law amended. Councillor Anderson — Are we compelled to levy this tax on machinery ? The City Solioitor— lt is not a separate rate. The officers of the Council, of course, would accept any instruction from the Council to exclude machinery in fixing the annual value of property. Mr. Brown— lt is a pure increase of the tax upon machinery. It is a quibble to Bay it is not taxing machinery. Councillor Anderson's question is to the point. We have nothing to say upon the rating of buildings. The City Solicitor explained that it was upon the judgment given by Mr. Martin, S.M., that active steps were taken this year in connection with maohinery. His (the City Solicitor's) explanation was quite correct. The tax wae not " upon " maohinery. He admitted that it did not make muoh difference, but he liked to be correct. The Mayor — Maohinery is simply an element in fixing the annual value. The City Solicitor— Simply an element. Councillor Myara— Has there been any inoreaie'of taxation this year upon property where there has been no alteration of the premises P Mr. Cable said there had been no alteration in his premises, and yet his taxes had been increased by .£IOO, and what else could he conclude but that the tax was put on his machinery, as stated in his valuation notice P Councillor Fraser — Don't you think the property has increased in value P Mr. Cable— l am certain there haa been no inorease. Mr. Brown— The tax has been inoreased without any inorease in value. The City Solicitor — Then you can apply to the Assessment Court to reduce it. 'Mr. Brown— Yes; but we oomo to the Council first. They represent us, and we have the right to come to them first. Mr. Hutchen— We have never taken the trouble to contest any of the assessments, but I am going to contest every one this year. The deputation then withdrew, the Mayor thanking them for their attendance. He was anre the discussion had onlightened himself and every member of the Counoil. At a later stage Councillor Bigginbottom moved that the tax upon machinery nsed for manufacturing purposes be suspended for the current year. This was the first he bad heard of the tax being enforced, and he was of opinion that if it waß enforced it would be doing injnry to the city. Councillor Myers agreed with the deputation that it was a most iniquitous thing to tax machinery, as apparently was being done. He thought the Council should have been consulted before a step of such importance was taken by its officers. He had heard nothing of the matter. Councillor Fraaer said he would like to call the attention of Councillors to the faot that according to the City Solicitor's explanation it was not ,a tax on machinery, and there was nothing new in it, bnt it had been going on for years. He thought the Council had better wait until the matter was settled in the Assessment Court. It seemed to him that if a man put up Venetian blinds in hia npnee or gave hia front fence an extra coat of paint be waa taxed for it. He did not agree with a tax upon improvements. Councillor Harcourt thought there was some misconception concerning the tax. If the City Valuer had pnt a tax upon maohinery be ought to be asked to take it off again, but it appeared to have been F^vVl r™ rm',r n ', The matter should be looked at fairly, and all things taken into %*tfVl° n -J ot iE » tan <*. a hotel waa taxed b.gher than an ordinary dwellinghouse, simply beoauso it was a hotel but it could not therofore bo said that the beer and apirits were being taxed. The same with manufacturing and other businesses. Councillor Tatum said it might not be a now tax, but there waa no doubt that it was a tax upon industry. He thought the , City Valuer should be aaked to givo hi* reasons for the tax upon maohinery. ■ -AiCouncillor Devine thought the tax a poli*&nc&l, not a, municipal, matter. It wan no more a tax upon industry than the tax was ,upon him when be improved his property. ''At Con n°il'» officer was. only doiDg his - duty m taxing acoording to the law. They mifCbt instrnct their offlcera not to inoreaee taxation unless there was a dear inorease in Vftltl6. «,«Sl lor *s. arris 88id i 4 wa « ola <* that theputhnprof the word "maohinery" into tho ?W 0B «, pa £ er had led to tha weaken idea tSLrSuFfu* thon K, h > hlld pado the matter plear, and they should not interfere except *uor«M« i had been specially made on account •"•*»« **ry. ■*• lointea out that Mr ' '«r to hii inatrno.

tions, and he thought that officer would bn able to satisfactorily explain to tho Council his reasons for any increases made. Connoillor Tanner did not think tha Council should ba affected in its decision by the influential nature of the deputation— they should do their duty to the city, and deal out justice without consideration of persons. He thought the present matter should be left to the officers of the Corporation and the Judge of the Assessment Court Councillor Anderson wanted to know if it was not a tax on machinery, what was it a tax on? It seemed to him that it was going to be a tax either upon the manufacturer or the consumer, and he would like to know where it was going to end. Councillor Barber moved that consideration of the matter be postponed until next meeting of the Works Committee, and that Mr. Ames be asked to attend that meeting. Councillor Smith seconded this. He was opposed to a tax upon machinery, bnt thought it would be found that there had not been any tax placed upon it. After a brief discussion the motion to adjourn the debate was agreed to.