INVISIBLE TAXES

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 60, 12 March 1937, Page 3

INVISIBLE TAXES

AVERAGE FAMILY BILL

INDIRECT BURDENS

The quickening interest of the general community in the fact that, although they may not be numbered among this year's payers of income tax, they cannot avoid a heavy bill in indirect taxation, raises the question of the size of that bill (says a statement by the Associated Chambers of Commerce of New Zealand). ; The following table shows the averj age amount paid in taxes (other than ! income-tax) by a family of four: —: ]925-2i>. 1033-36. 193G-37. • £ s. il. £ r. cl. £ s. d. ( Indirect taxes 3D C 3 43 S 3 00 17 D Unemployment i taxes ... ■— 10 0 7 10 13 11 £39 B S £53 8 10 *£G1 11 4 'Estimated. Then there is the matter of taxation on companies. The individual payer of income tax or of indirect taxes, or of both, is wrong if he thinks that taxation on companies does not affect him. The recent increase in the rate of income taxation on companies (rising in graduations up to 7s 6d in the £ on companies of moderate size) affects him very closely, because a company, in estimating costs, takes income tax into account just as much as it does wages and rents —it must do if it is to pay dividends, hold and attract the | capital necessary for its operations, j and continue to provide employment for workers. , Consequently, most of I the taxation on companies is paid by | the public in higher prices for goods and services. The consuming public, therefore swells Government revenues by this substantial invisible addition to the family taxation bill. NO COSTLESS SERVICES. . Information now available from the Census and Statistics Department shows that of the £4,288,618 revenue from income tax in 1935-36, only £1,445,310 (or 33.8 per cent.) was paid by individuals, while £2,806,823 (or 65.4 per cent.) was paid by companies—the small balance being paid by non-resi-dent traders, and agents for debenture holders. (In passing, it is to be noted that the Government Statistician's figures show the average amount paid in income tax in 1935-36 by individuals —not companies—was £21 14s 9d per taxpayer.) _ _ . Therefore, the average industrial, commercial, or agricultural employee, who pays little .or nothing in direct taxes, is nevertheless a substantial contributor to the cost of government. It workers in general realised this truth they would be less complacent in the face of the rising tide of taxation and public debt. The lesson to be learned from the present excessive taxation is that the taxpayer cannot expect to have his taxes reduced, and at the same time have more money spent by Government. Public services cannot be given unless they are paid for. There is no beating the tax bill. The diffl-| culty is that highly-organised minorities demand public service—at the expense of the great body of taxpayers.