Grey River Argus and Blackball News TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1922. THE TAXATION SCANDAL

Grey River Argus, 17 October 1922, Page 4

Grey River Argus and Blackball News

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1922. THE TAXATION SCANDAL

Delivered every moi nlni in Gr. >uth. K nt, Hokitika. Dobson. V/.illsend, Tayhn AIL, CroaAUun. Ngahere. Blackball. Nelson Creek. Brunner, T* KQnftha ku-tomanu. t’oerua, Inchbonnie. Pz.tarz, Riiru, Kaimata, Kottikv Mcana. Aratika. Bunangx, Dunouie, Cobden, BaxLer s, Kokiri, Ahaura, Ikamatua ; Sti/lwater, Waiuta, Reef ton, Ross, Rtijitapua, Mana nui. H.iri Hari. Waiho Gorge, Weheka, Rewanui Otira, Inangabua junction. Westport, Waimaug.u a, Denniston, . Giunity. Millerton. Ngakawau. Hector* Seddouvilie, Cape Fouhvind. and Karams

: \\ ben a country is paying" away in interest one-third of the national income, it is surely a questionable time to reduce the direct contributions thereto from the wealthy people. But it is fur worse to place upon the shoulders of the workers and the small owners and traders an extra burden to ilie extent in which the wealthy are being let off. Yet that is just what the Government have been doing, and are still doing by their latest Land and Income Tax Bill, which reduces these taxes in such a way that while the smaller incomes and holdings pay from 13/4 to say £l4 less per annum, the big incomes and large estates gain to the extent of from £37 to over £l4OO per annum. In addition, there are the rebates of ten per cent, and there is moreover nearly one million sterling in these two forms of direct taxation that is not yet paid for this year. It is laughable to read the different explanations which, the Government and its backers give for their action. Thus one Tory-paper says the object is to reduce the cost of living and the volume of unemployment, whereas the Prime Minister’s aim is to extract more out of the poor, so as to relieve the rich from what he calls an unfair burden. Now the Taxation Commission (which represents only the wealthy class, and not the workers) favoured a readjustment of company taxation, so that the small incomes from these would not have to pay in the same proportion as the large ones, but Mr Massey says his only idea of a readjustment would be. to tax the very small incomes more numerously and extensively. If the workers could be got to swallow the contention that to reduce the taxes on big incomes and big properties will bettor their general condition, they naturally would bo expected to support the Government, but they know from experience that ths wealthy use any increase in income to project a monopoly and to maintain and raise prices. This design and not the war taxation explains the curtailed production. The workers the proportion of five or six to one fought the war to protect the property of the well-to-do but their reward is to be asked afterwards to pay more in reduction of war debt. The end in view in these taxation reductions is largely party advantage. If taxes were raised there would be more land thrown on the market and at prices that would promote settlement, and produce a better distribution of population On the other hand, the tax reductions, by increasing the profits of .monopoly, will induce renewed land speciation, rand hence the not.oriou< vb* adVanpe on larnid values f ' so mpch. to the >wuol growers, stock j. ratsers arid others stunted the output to , keep; pfjeps up. TM workers are bc-

? ing now asked to pay off the war debt. , That explains why: the Budget. says there is '£25,000,000 of a surplus, and yet Mr Massey'bays Tie has no money • to develop the country. It there were a-hoiresi; desire to reduce the taxes ? tlihfT people most, then our t ..tariff would be overhauled, I ans th<> high imposts on necessities of : life would be removed. If the war . inTeres'ts.' demanded substantial tax- : atiQn^wjiyghould not peace interests justify it| -_ r lf there were the intension to helprthose most in need of

help, the interest on mortgages would be reduced. If there were no desire to favour the rich, then we would have Slate banking and insurance monopolies. Look at the huge incomes of the banks and insurance companies. In the aggregate, they would soon pay off the national debt. It is the people’s toil, the national credit, that backs the

bank note issues and the. insurance ( i ompanie's , risks. The national revenue for the current year is likely to be only £27,000,000, whilst it has" in time past reached £34,000,000. Why then reductions only to favour the rich? If a taxpayer is within the scope of high taxes, he must possess the taxable wealth. If not, he escapes. This year income tax has fallen a couple of millions, so that those involved are to that extent paying less without any readjustment.. Seven years ago the accumulated wealth, of the Dominion was £285,000,000. Last year it was no less than £562,000,000. It had practically doubled in six years. YVar profits largely made up this growth. YVhere are those profits? Are they stopping production, and creating unemployment? Are they the reason why taxes must be reduced, or crushing the possessors so that they groan under the burden? So the Tories seem to believe! A levy of ten per cent on those profits would do wonders to restore the Dominion to a sound financial position, nationally speaking. And, if big estates were at the same time taxed existence, the return to the State at ‘lower ra-tes of taxation would-be so much greater

than now, that the meanest administration ’ imaginable ■ would see its way to reduce ’ charges ?on public utilities to that degree that .would cause a bigger demand, and. a rush of business, with a further consequent gain to the

State’s exchequer. It is all a-matter of the.: cla'ss •’standpoint. Parties that study first and last to conserve the. interests of., the wealthy are naturally driven to penalise the vast • majority, and the poor people are vastly in the majority. The masses, however, must use • their., common sense and elect an administration that will play the game before they can expect an era of prosperity again.