The Star. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1905. TAXATION.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume L, Issue 8930, 23 November 1905, Page 4

The Star.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1905. TAXATION.

Dehvewa every evening by 6 [o'clock in Howera Man»i», Normanby, Okkiawa, Eltham, MangaJ? M| ?$t a *9!l Aw » t « n »' Opnnike, Otakeho, Manutahi, Alton, Hnrleyvlfle, Patea, anc( Wayexley.

We do not know that much practical advantage is likely to arise from the Farmers' Union discussion of the land tax. It is a tax which has now been on the Statute Book for fourteen or fifteen yeare, and it may be regarded as part of the settled policy of the country, not to be disturbed whatever party may be in power. In fact, many who opposed it at the outset mainly for the reason that it was unnecessary and impolitic to disturb the system of taxation known as the property tax (which on the whole worked well and easily could have been materially improved' so that it would have worked better) would now object to any serious interference with the land tax. But even if the old opponents of the land tax were ever so minded to repeal, the forces against them have so .materially increased that repeal is not within the range of practical politics. Therefore, it appears to be useless to raise such a question. It is quite arguable that there may be room for modification in connection, with the tax. If the Premier is in earnest in his talk about revision of the tariff, then it would be broad and wise policy on his part to consider the question of lowering the present land tax exemption, and making hie Customs revision so wide-reaching that it would give substantial relief to the small farmer. Of course he talks of doing that, and making up Joss of revenue by increasing the graduated tax, but the official figures 06 to the graduated tax show that whatever its political effect, it is of no uee^is a financial sheet-anchor, and probably no one knows that better than the Premier. But to return, it is mere mockery to give the farmer on one hand an exemption- in respect of land tax, which nominally relieves him, while on the other he is unmercifully squeezed by a. Customs taxation which probably is unequalled for its severity in any other British colony. People do not know how much of their incomes is paid- away in indirect taxation 1 , and unfortunately for themselves and for the cause of economical government they do not seem to care. We have xuu doubt that if the figures could be got at it would very greatly surprise the email farmers and the artisan to learn what a large proportion of Shear income is taken from them to pay Customs taxation, and merchants' and traders' interest and profits thereon. It would be found true personal economy by the small farmer to give up his land tax exemption and^ take his relaef in the way of a reduction of indirect taxation. It would pay him still better in another way. The larger the proportion of taxation paid directly the keener the interest taken by the taxpayer

in expenditure. We venture the opinion that there is more popular watchfulness over local government expenditure than there ie over colonial expenditure, simply because the taxation ie direct' and more personally felt. The land and ' income tax exemptions are very wise party expedients, and all Governments, whether socalled Liberal or so-called Conservative, hold to them very largely for party purposes. They want to get as much revenue as they can with the least trouble, they want to pull as many feathers as they can, without making the bird squeal too loudly; and the best way to do that is to keep the bulk of the people in ignorance of what they are paying. If our system of taxation were more direct and less indirect in respect of the bulk of the voters, the Treasurer of New Zealand would soon be hiade to reduce hia demands on the taxpayer by at least uau a million a year, and the country would Be as well, if not better, governed than it is <now.