MANY ANOMALIES

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20186, 2 March 1940, Page 12

MANY ANOMALIES

INCREASE TAX LAW ACCOUNTANTS CRITICAL - 1 f +* J ! i% . . UNFAIR INCIDENCE ATTITUDE TO TAXPAYER (Ter Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this clay. In a discussion following a paper read by Mr. C. R. Richardson,' Wellington, in which'he discussed at the convention of the New Zealand Society of Accountants yesterday some aspects of the income tax law in New Zealand, Mr. L. M. "Satterthwaite, in moving a vote of thanks, - said the paper had brought to light many injustices in the law -that should be taken up by the Accountants’ Society and brought forcibly 'to the notice of the authorities. A few of the chief points brought out by Mr. Richardson were anomalies in taxation’yields as between' learned ancl unearned incomes.' He also alleged unfairness of taxation of dividends from private companies, such revenue being from distributions subjected to the maximum rate of tax through -company taxation prior to distribution. As regards earned and unearned incomes, he said it was difficult to see how the existing process of discrimination could" possibly be justified. The nature of the income surely did not affect the relative capacity of a person to pay. Passing the “Buck” Mr. G. Reid, Dunedin, said it had become apparent in the past year or two that anomalies were being created not so much by legislation as by departmental methods of procedure ancl interpretation. Contrasted' With the past there was a tendency on‘ the part of officers to “pass the buck,” as it were on to the taxpayer. If he did not like it, he was practically invited to bring a case and fight it. That was a completely wrong attitude for any department to adopt toward the taxpayer. T: He expressed the opinion that it was a great pity there was not some Sort of organisation in existence ' "which, when points of principle arose affecting taxpayers, could take then) up and fight them. - I .' - -1 Several speakers referred to what they described as the' invidious position of the Commissioner of'TSfes. They said he should h6t be a gatherer but merely a revenue-collec-tor. ' Some suggested there'should 1 be an intermediary body to act as" between the'commissioner and' the taxpayer and decide questions without great expense and in ,an impartial manner.