SOCIAL SECURITY AND WAR TAXATION
(To the Editor.)
Sir, —In endeavouring to provide for my old age I joined the Superannuation Fund of the local body by whom I was employed. At that period, by reason of my age, I had to pay 8 per cent, contribution. I was then also paying unemployment levy. Being retired during the depression, I had to pay Is in the £ on income other than salary on my own savings, which I consider was and still is an imposition. But now we are informed that income received last year other than salary is penalised to the extent of double the amount. All wage-earners last year to March 31, 1940, and up to July 22 only paid Is in the £ of money earned. Why the distinction? If Social Security benefits were in operation when I was put off I could have drawn out my contributions in a lump sum, and if under £500 allowed by the Act I would have been able to bank it and then draw 30s a week, both for myself and my wife. I am quite willing to- pay my war tax, but why make the payments of 1939-40 retrospective? The fact that I am on superannuation saves the Government £156 a year.—l am, etc.,
FAIR PLAY WANTED,
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19400731.2.40.1
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume CXXX, Issue 27, 31 July 1940, Page 6
Word Count
216SOCIAL SECURITY AND WAR TAXATION Evening Post, Volume CXXX, Issue 27, 31 July 1940, Page 6
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in