Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE THURSDAY, JULY 17, 1941. "RESPITE" BUDGET.

Greymouth Evening Star, 17 July 1941, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE THURSDAY, JULY 17, 1941. "RESPITE" BUDGET.

'T’I.IE reception given by the nation 1o the Budget presented to Parliament. lasi evening, by Mr. Nash, will probably be favourable, if for no other reason than that, no additional direct [taxation was proposed. This was a welcome surprise, and although some will suspect *‘electioneering,” the respite will be none the [ less appreciated. Labour budgets have so consistently increased taxation, that such heavier annual burden has come to be regarded as almost inevitable, especially in view of war commitments. The present relief may prove to be temporary, as supplementary budgets and Order,s-in-Conncii are I powers iii reserve for a harassed Treasurer. Mr. Nash could not have expected to escape criticism,’ and he is? being blamed for not imposing more taxes. Most people will think that enough has been done in that, direction for the time being. According to the Official. Year Book, taxation, per head in New Zealand for the year ended March 31, 1940, amounted to £27/4/8. The following figures indicate the variation that has taken place in taxation over the last ten years: — 1931, £l2/12/-; 1932, £ll/9/-; 1933, £l2/17/-; .1934, £l3/18/-; 1935, £l5/18/-; 1936, £l6/5/-; 1937,' £l9/14/-; 1938, £23/1/3; j [1939, £23/8/9; 1940. £27/4/8. In- < eluding war and Social Security ; taxation, taxes imposed directly ; on incomes produced £20,432,000 < in 1939-40, as compared with £l4,- j 296,000 in 1938-39 and £3,534,000 j in 1929-30. Special war taxation for the first six months of the war < amounted to £2,182,000, of which r approxi mately 60 per cent, was de- - rived from special income tax. When local bodies’ demands|c have also to be met, it must

agreed that the New Zealand taxation burden is heavy, especially as less than half of the population bears the brunt. “So much per head,” ignores the fact that women and children and many wage earners contribute little to the total. Moreover, indirect taxation in the Dominion is on a large scale. Orthodox financiers may censure Mr. Nash for not taking more from the taxpayers .in order to prevent extravagance and inflation, but the majority of those’ concerned will forgive Mr. Nash for any error by benevolence. Government expenditure in non-war avenues' is to be reduced, despite increases in social security benefits and pension payments. The Minister’s proposals scarcely dewserve the eulogy bestowed by the Labour Press, but he is to be commanded for doing so well,-consid-ering all the circumstances. One disquieting feature is the decision to raise further large loans. It would be impracticable to collect the money needed for war and civil purposes, without loans. Adverse criticism will also be tempered by the fact that the money is to be raised mostly in the Dominion. The effect on industrial and other enterprise of this Government borrowing must be serious, as the amount of money available is limited. Posterity will have its own special, burdens and should not be left too great an inheritance of loans 1o pay. It is reasonable, however, that future generations, whose -welfare is being safeguarded to-day, should help towards meeting the financial cost of the war. None can question the national weakness for borrowing, and, here again, the Official Year Book gives a warning. It states that the total, public loan indebtedness <>f New Zealand amounts to £225 per head of population. The aggregate is £367,000.000, oJ which just over £70.000,000 is local body debt, the balance being the gross indebtedness of the general Government. True, the country has great assets, but for m land with only 11 millions of people, the Dominion is a much nearer neighbour of Queer Street, than most of its inhabitants realise.