UNEMPLOYMENT TAX

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 84, 6 October 1933, Page 8

UNEMPLOYMENT TAX

EMERGENCY CHARGE

PAYMENT AFTER DEATH?

The Court of Appeal today was engaged in hearing an appeal from a judgment of Mr. Justice Ostler in a case in which questions of law were raised as to the liability of tho executors and .trustees .of the late Mr. G. D. Greenwood, of Teviotdale, Canterbury, to pay instalments of the unemployed emergency 'charge imposed by the Unemployment Amendment Act,----1931, for which tho testator would have been liable personally had ho lived. It was contended on behalf of the trustees that all liability to pay further instalments ceased on the death of the testator, but this contention was not upheld by Mr. Justice Ostler, whose 'finding* was that the trustees were liable to the Crown both for the two unpaid instalments of the tax on tho 1932 income and for all four instalments of the tax on the income for the year ended March 31, 1933. There was on the bench tho Chief Justice .(Sir Michael Myers), Mr. Justice Reed, Mr. Justice MacGregor, and Mr.. Justice Smith. . ~ Mr. H. D. . Aeland- .(Christchurch), Mr. P. B. Cooke, and .'Mr.. H. J. V. James appeared for the appellants, and Mr. A. Fair, K.C., for the Crown. CHARGE NOT IMPOSED DURING LIFETIME. Mr. Cooke said that the.facts of the case, as shortly stated by Mr. Justice Ostler in. his judgment, were that Mr. Greenwood died on August 28, 1932. For the year ended February, 1932, his income was £25,663 2s.' None of this was in respect of salary or wages. For tho purposes of the case, it was asssumed that the income was received by' the testator for the year ended March 31, 1932. On May 21, and again on August 4, 1932, the testator duly paid, the quarterly instalments of the emergency unemployment charge, and the trustees contended that all liability to pay further instalments ceased on Mr. Greenwood's death on August 28, 1932. On the other hand, the Crown contended that the trustees were liable to pay the instalments of the charge that would have been payable by the tostator in November, 1932, and in February, 1933, had he lived. It was contended by Mr. Cooke that the unemployment emergency charge was purely a personal tax which could be collected only from persons who remained alive when any instalment becamo due. The Statute, he claimed, disclosed a clear intention to impose the same burden both on persons receiving, salary or wages and on persons receiving other income. Counsel submitted that tho personal representatives of a person who died in any year mentioned in the Statute were not liable for instalments ot the emergency"unemployment charge in such year that did not become due and payable before his death. Counsel pointed out that the Act provided that a person was only liable for the payment of the flmerjjeney charge so long as he remained ordinarily resident in New Zealand. The Chief Justice: So that he may be liable for the first payment and not the second ? Mr. CookeT Yes, that is my submission; and I submit also that the words "ordinarily resident in Now Zealand" impliedly indicate that a cessation of liability for further instalments at once occurs when tho cessation of residence is due to death. Tho Chief Justice: You say this was not a statutory charge imposed in his lifetime? , Mr. Cooke: Yes; that is what we say. . Counsel then dealt with parts of the judgment givßii in-the Supreme Court. Argument 's proceeding.