COMPLETE MORTGAGE CONTROL

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 76, 31 March 1934, Page 10

COMPLETE MORTGAGE CONTROL

(To the Editor.) Sir,—ln 'your sub-leader o£ . March .27 you say, "If the Government is to control mortgages, to readjust debts, arid, ;in a. few words, to reapportion assets as between mortgagee and mortgagor, it cannot stop short at that point," and you then point, out how the mortgagor. may profit later on if. prices of land and property come back in value. This; should not be allowed to eventuate. I previously, in your cahinins, pointed oufc.the injustice of a similar possibility, which has been sanctioned, though in a different way, by allowing a building subsidy to those able to build without providing for a refund of the subsidy or a share of the unearned increment when prices rise. This is unjust to the taxpayers. ~ If all land were revalued and an equitable reduction in the mortgages and the equity held were made, it would be a forward step towards the salvation of New Zealand," provided . that all future unearned increment in land of every description was taken over by the State, leaving the new valuations as the basis of land values in New Zealand for a long term. Any alteration therein made in the course of years could be the new valuation basis for taxation of land, but not for owners of land to make a profit. This would kill the evil of trafficking in land, and put it on a fair basis to allow production to flourish. The unearned increment could be used, if realised by;:the sale of land, to rednce taxation. - r i This kind of control would not be wholly inconsistent with private control of the assets mortgaged, because any owner could sell his property at the valuation, price arid give a good title to" the purchaser, but could not make profits onthe sale, as the sin-plus above valuation would pass to the Government (the people). It seems to me that if we desire: to help the "country, the reapportioning 'of assets '.as. between mortgagee and mortgagorrmust-take place; One cannot—or- should not—be sacrificed at the expense of the other. ''Both' are affected. by circumstances beyond ■ their control, and justice demands that if losses must bo made they .should be shared pro; rata by both parties according to the amount of their holding.'; Land must be revalued and a new land policy considered, and the sooner the better for everyone.— 1 am, etc., . ■ ! ' , r . : ; ' .EQUITY.