THE SYSTEM OF RATING

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 88, 14 April 1934, Page 12

THE SYSTEM OF RATING

(To the Editor.)

Sir,T—Notwithstanding my cleat* statement, of the-reasons-\vhy-. I favour rating pnthe unimproved value 'of, land in preference -to'/the^annual or. capital value, ypurrcorrespondent,. "Ratepayer," again confesses that he-doesfno't understand my idea's on :the .subject.. 'After, reading his letterr\vhich appeared in your issue '.61 the 11th inst.,?'l have 'grave, doubts whether "Ratepayer"' understands .his .-own ideas on the question.- ~' ,"-.'/'':;,!' ■■'-. ■-. ''': ;■' '

In. the first paragraph of': 'his letter "Ratepayer" contends that in the valuation of land a higher-.value,per foot is placed on improved : land than on land with no improvements, and thereby improvements are i taxed under our present rating system. In the second paragraph his grievance is that a highly improved section with an eight-storey building bringing in; thousands ,of pounds per annum in rents.pays no more' rates, than an adjoining section of the, same area with a onestorey building.

These, two paragraphs are contradictory, and it seems tliat in some cases "Ratepayer" would tax improvements a,hd in other cases he thinks it. most unjust to .do so. In my opinion no improvements, whether they be gardens ,oy eight-storey buildings, should be taxed. ;

Reverting to the question of eight-storey buildings, it is quite - true that in many cases they bring in thousands of pounds per annum.in rents. It is.also true that, capital charges, excess water charges^ Jaml; other costs ifl connection with the same run into many thousands' oL pounds per annum. It does not follow that. the 'net profits from an eight-storey'Tbuilding are any greater than those ', derived' from a-one-storey building; in some,cases they are not as great. Some of the large modern buildings that are not only an ornament i to our city, but are*filling a much-needed and useful business requirement, are show-, ing. a considerable loss. '• 'This is'where the gross injustice' of the system of rating' on the annual value comes in. As pointed out in a previous letter it taxes assets to the.;full without making any allowance for liabilities.—l am, etc., . ■■ ■ A. PARLANE. April 12. / . ' v: