NATIONAL FINANCE

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 34, 9 August 1934, Page 12

NATIONAL FINANCE

PBE-BUDGET. lIEVIEW

EXPENDITURE AND TAXATION

(By the Associated Chambers of

Commerce.)

. As tho Budget is to be presented to the House in a few days' time a review at this juncture of the official figures relating to Government expenditure and taxation is not inappropriate. The figures are disturbing in a number of particulars when comparisons are made.

Government Expenditure from the Consolidated

Fund, and. Including Unemployment.

1928-20 3920-30 1(130-31 11131-32 l!) 32-:« 11)33-31

2-1,176,000 25,200.000 24,708,000 27,114,000 20,31B,0«0 .25,4iu,000

The above table shows how obstinate aro tho costs of government, and how ineffective in reducing total expenditure have been tho considerable economies effected by tho Government in particular directions. The total expenditure has not come down at all, but has actually increased in 1933-34 by well over two million pounds as compared with the previous year, and by over four and a quarter million as compared with 1928-29. . ' As the estimates of departmental expenditure will appear in tho House at the same time as the Budget is brought down, it will be generally expected that full cognisanco will have been given to the need for considerably reduced Government expenditure, and that the estimates1-,-will have been framed accordingly. The existing burdon on the people as a whole is further illustrated by tlio following tablo dealing with taxation expressed as a percentage of tho national income:— • Taxation as Percentage) of National Income. £ millions. Xnllnnnl . . Income. , Taxation. I'cri-c'ntagc. l!)2S-^!> 1,13.24 J7.53 H.6S l!)29-;iO ■ .... Hti.RS- . 111.47 Ki:2» 1930-31 .... 10.5..92 !H.W) 1">.84 ioai-:-i3 .... 3oi.ru n.i:s n.on 1932-3:! 102.96 I!I.O2 IH.OO 1933-34 .... f>— 21. IS *— ■ *Xot available. Tho tab^lc shows that the share of the national iucomo taken by the Government from the people' by moans of taxes has steadily increased from 11£ per cent, in 1928-20 to 19 per cent.'in 1932-33. Taxation relief in somo form or other is fully expected of the Budget by the over-weighted public. They have the additional tax burden of local government rates, and while these are not tho | concern of the Budget, the fact remains that local government taxes in New Zcalitnd are very much higher per head than in Australia. The position j with regard to general Government taxation (exclusive of local government) is set out in the ' following ; table:— • ' , 1 Comparative Government Taxation. ' Now Zealand. Australia. £ s. d. s a. a. 19.32-33 12 17 i> 14 4 3 •1 2 5 1933-3' Xl 3IS 7 . 13 ,1 10 "Less,reductions in 1933-34. ' s The table shows that at the same time as Australian taxation was reduced by £1 2s 5d a head, New Zealand taxation was increased by £1 0s 10d a head. Still further relief for tho Australian taxpayer has now been announced, but so far tho lot of the Now Zealand taxpayer has. been tho sick heart of hope defcrrod.