TAXATION

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 14 October 1922, Page 7

TAXATION

PROPOSED REDUCTIONS

REPEAL OF SUPER-TAX

(iii XiiLiG.ttAJ'lf IUtKSS ASSOCIATION.; WELLINGTON, Oct. 13. The House went into committee today on the Land and Income Tax Bill. Mr. R. McGallum (Wairau) said the number of people who would benefit by the repeal of the super-tax was small, and he asked whether the Premier was wise in making this concession at a time when he was so much in need of money. Mr. H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labour Party) said the Labour Party was against the reapeal of the supertax, which was really a concession to big landed estates. If the House could vote on the issue freely he had no doubt it would say the jconcessions should apply only to small men. Mr. Massey claimed that the concessions would not benefit any particular class, but would benefit the whole community. Nearly a million of money was being given back to the people, and rightly so, because no country could prosper if too heavily taxed. Over 100,000 people would benefit directly by the remission of taxation, but it would go far beyond; it would assist the whole community. Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) contended it was not the users, but the holders, of lano! who would benefit by j the concession. After further discussion, Mr. Holland moved to amend clause two in the direction of limiting the remission of taxation to .-taxpayers whose taxable balance of rural lands does not exceed £10,000. On a division the amendment was rejected by 51 votes to 13. Mr. McCallum. then moved that the remission should not apply to estates of over £20,000 in value. On a division the "amendment was last by 42 votes to 21. The clause was then passed. At clause five, providing for the remission of the super income tax, Mr. ' Holland again protested that the con-. cession would mean nothing to the1 small taxpayers, but to men and com-' panics with big incomes it would mean I a gift of hundreds of thousands of pounds. I Mr. Holland called for a division on clause five, specifying the rates of in-' come" tax to Be levied. j : The clauses-was retained by 42 votes to 7. , . I ,

On clause 1% reducing income tax on foreign insurance companies from 10 to 5 per cent, Mr. T. X, Sidey (Dunedin South) complained thaTT it was placing local' cowrga-nies at a difadvantage. The Prime Minister replied that if the concession was not granted a- great loss would accrue to" New Zealand, as reinsurance business would simply be arranged in London:

Mr. T. M. Wilford' (Leader of the Opposition) tirged that there should not ."be such a disparity between the reduction in income tax imposed on foreign insurance companies and thaf on other companies. Mr. D. Jones (Kaiapoi) pointed out thaß the high tax on foreign companies simply meant higher rates of insurance. He would urge, however, that the" concession should not apply to insurance contracts already made on the current season's produce. The Pz'ime Minister said he was not fully satisfied with the clause, and would like to look further into the' matter. The clause was passed unamendedl On clause 14 (special provision as to a business carried on by a husband and wife), -Mr. Wilford drew attention to the many Chinese partnerships which were making large profits and paying little, if any, income tax. / The Prime Minister said he would enquire into the matter, and progress was reported.