“SURPLUS ON PAPER ONLY”

Evening Star, Issue 18258, 24 April 1923, Page 10

“SURPLUS ON PAPER ONLY”

SO SAYS MR HOLLAND. PRIME MINISTER HOLDS BACK EXPENDITURE. UNJUSTIFIABLE ATTACK ON PUBLIC SERVANTS’ WAGES. [Pkh United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, April 23. Referring to the Prime Minister’s statement in regard In the financial situation, Mr H. E. Holland, leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party, said that Mr Massey's surplus appeared to him to be a surplus on paper only. In his opinion, it was produced by several methods, one of which was, of course, unjustifiable. He, referred to the attack on public servants’ wages Another method was the holding back of expenditure on necessary public works, education, etc., and yet another was the increase in Customs duties, which meant added burdens for those least able to hear them. Not only had a surplus been, produced in this way, but, in addition, under cover of the pica that reductions in taxation were necessary', enormous concessions had been made to the more wealthy land and income taxpayers. _ To give one illustration only, ho mentioned that out of items on the Estimates totalling £6,854 to ho, expended by th© Bullcr County, only £3,062 had been made available, which meant that the sum of £3,772 included- :n the last Estimates had not yet been spent. Out of £17, 1V) on the Estimates to he spent hv the Urcv County, £6,452 had not been authorised. " What was true of these counties was undoubtedly tine of most of the others. Then the Customs duties showed an increase of nearly £1,000,000, bringing the total up to well over £6,000,000. Side by side with these additional burdens on the rank and file of the people was the decrease of over £2,500,000 in land and income taxation, leaving the Customs taxation by far the heaviest item of income. The tax reductions were of little benefit to small landholders and men with small incomes, hut they' meant foi tunes to the wealthy. Landholders with taxable balances ranging from £20,000 up to £190,000 enjoyed reductions of from £4O up to £1,600, while the vast majority of the real land workers—the 10,000 or 20,000 who paid less than £lO a year in land tax—benefited to the extent of less than £l. Even where the taxable balance stood at £5,000 the reduction only amounted to £6 or £7. What applied to land tax also applied to income tax. _ Taxpayers with small incomes had received reductions which amounted to a few pence in the case of very low assessable incomes, and to only £s' or £6 where the income stood as high as even £500; but the taxpayers with huge incomes had been given reductions ranging from about £46 on an assessable £2,000 up to £2,500 on £3o'ooo. Big financial 1 institutions wore the greatest beneficiaries. The Bank of New Zealand and other hanking concerns were given deductions running into lens of thousands. Not only did small landholders and income taxpayers suffer in comparison with the wealthy in the matter of these reductions, hut the petty relief accorded the small men was more than offset by the increased Customs duties. Again, the reductions in taxation applied to all big city business houses ami owners of city properties, including such as that at inickland, which the other day changed hands at £1,420 per foot. He predicted that, notwithstanding this latest surplus, and the fact that the accumulated surpluses now stood at £25,000,000, the Government would still plead that no money was available when a.sked to go ahead- with urgent public works.