The Evening Star. MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1929. RATING SYSTEMS.

Evening Star, Issue 20150, 15 April 1929, Page 6

The Evening Star. MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1929. RATING SYSTEMS.

Si.xtK the appearance of tho town clerk’s annual report Mr C. M. Moss has addressed to ns two letters. In both of those strong dissatisfaction is expressed with tho present system of rating* but whether in to-day’s letter Mr Moss advocates a change to the only alternative permitted by law, the rating on unimproved values, it is difficult to say. Apparently Mr Moss’s complaints trace back to a paragraph in Mr Lcwin's report on the inequity ol rating for providing funds for unemployment relief. It was 'really a. criticism of tho rigidity of the law in respect of local taxation. Mr Lewin pointed out that there is no escape from many recipients of the proceeds having to ho contributors to it in the same ratio as the rest of their rating. He suggested legislative alteration with the General Government’s income tax as a model, in which event there would presumably be exemption for those on or dose to the border line financially speaking. It would bo a poor outjook if one were to accept unemployment on its present scale as likely to bo chronic year after year and alter our local taxation system on that account. Probably Mr Lewin utilised a. topic of the hour just after the floods as an argument in support of theories he has long held. About nine years ago he wrote fairly fully on the matter, and stressed the point that the whole basis of local rating rested on a far too restricted foundation. Three years later he reported at length on the unimproved value system of rating. In one all-important respect this runs counter to the principle of expansion ot the base of taxation; for it restricts it by the elimination of the tax on im-

provemeuts. Furthermore the result

of adoption of rating on the unim-. proved value loads lo congestion. What the town clerk holds up as an ideal for the growing city is concentration without congestion. And not. oven the .staunchest advocates of the system can deny that it produces anomaly and inequity when applied to an area partly residential and partly business promises. Then, again, there arc anomalies as between different classes of businesses. Broadly speaking, the manufacturer would come off worse than the trader. Foundries,, for* example, would be severely hit, since they require a hig floor space. Air Lowin quoted one case whera a foundry standing on one and a-lialf acres would have its rates raised from £IS6 to £IOB. And as to anomalies in residential taxation, the owner of a £5,000 homo and the owner of a £I,OOO home on adjoining sections of an equal value of £4OO each would pay the same rates—i.c., £l3 15s Cd each—whereas under our present system the rates in 1923 were £57 7s 6d and £l4 17s 6d respectively. If Air Aloes really advocates . the only possible change in system which the law at present allows, he may encounter opposition on tho ground that not "always would tho burden be apportioned to those best able to bear it, and wc give him credit for having that fundamental of good government well in mind. Air I-ewiu came to the conclusion that tho annual or rental value system conforms more nearly to the “ ability to pay ” maxim than does the unimproved value system. Ho left it lo the council to decide between the two systems, and on tho weight of evidence the council continued with the annual value system. Some of them admit its delects, hut consider them as the lesser of two evils. As tho law in tho meantime forbids any third course—such as a speciallydevised tax ou all unused lands within a specified zone or an application oi the income tax to local rating—criticism of the council as apathetic or reactionary in this matter is hardly just.