WAR TAXATION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17079, 31 January 1916, Page 3

WAR TAXATION.

CONSCIUPTTON OF WEALTH NOT CONFISCATION,

MR. GEORGE WITTY'S VIEWS,

In connection with proposals tha have been made to moot the expense of the war. many people havo derivei the impression that "conscription o wealth " and "confiscation " are synon ymous terms. On Saturday a reports drew the attention of Mr Gcorg< Witty, M.P., who, like many more o the public men of the Dominion, ha: advocated a readjustment of the bur den of taxation, and amongst othei things the conscription of wealth, t< this phase of the question, and askec him to elaborate the pointMr Witty said that ho had noticec that a great many people did not appear to distinguish the difference between the two terms, but, as a mattoi of fact, they were as wid'e asunder as the poles, amd he was at a loss to understand why even, well-informed people should persist in arguing that conscription of wealth moans confiscation. Continuing, Mr Witty said: "In my mind there is absolutely no relationship between the two terms. By con-

scription of wealth I understand a sys torn of taxation which regulates tin burden which every man is to just according to his ability to earn that load'; in other words, it means i 'square deal' to all, the rich and the poor alike. Confiscation, on the othei hand, means the theft of a man's property, although ho might bo utilising that property to the fullest extent. The only time when •confiscation' should operate would be when a man did not use his property or products for the general weal of the country in which he reside.-;, or when he is exploiting the nubiic for personal gain. Even in- such "cases I would not advocate 'confiscation ' in the sense of depriving him of his property without compensation. I think the word 'commandeering ' is a better one in such a ease, as in the case of confiscation there would bo no payment, and I hold that it would be "immoral to take away any man's property without compensating him for it. Certainly I would never consent to such an action on the part of the Government of the country, and 1 am satisfied that no party m {he State, would dream of promoting legislation to that end. Even if we had 'conscription of wealth.' that would not menu that all property would be transferred to the State: it would mean that those possessed of large means would be asked to contribute something more than they are contributing now to the cost of defending the Empire against the encroachments of the Huns and their .Allies. Even in

countries whore conscription of mci i« the law of the laud, nil men eligible for active service tl'o not follow tin colours: just as all money and pro pertv would not be taken in the caw of ' conscription of wealth.' I thirtt the present is a, very proper time tr adopt such a. system here, and T cannot.see that it would moan any greal hardship. We are all being called upon to pav something more than in normal times; and I think it only right and fair that there should bo a readjustment. ■ . '•My idea is that those who are at the present time making largo profits as a result of the Avar enhancing the prices of various commodities should par a fair proportion of the added burden There can he no doubt that the profits on manv of our loading products have increased. Take wool, for in-

stance. Thirty rears ago T sold the best merino wool at <l.k.' per lb, whilst the cost of shearing was 20s por 100. To-day mc-ino wool, of the same class brings prices up to 2s por 11), whilst the cost of shearing has remained practicallv stationary. Who is benefiting by the increase! prices? Not the man who toils. Further, the weight of the averace fleece to-day is unto 21b greater than it was three decades ago. Oan anyone say that the men who are reapin. those ■'largo nrofits should not pay their fair share of the cost of protect,f .he country? Wool is not the only ommodity from which Ur S e profile boing ■ mad'e. According to the publigiecl ••oturns, our exports show an increase of £3.000.000. Who has made thecain? There is no need to ask. "lie proposal *o lower the income tax exemption to' £157. advocated in s me quarters, would, I think, be a slop ill the «t«tt direction, since it would further penalise those who ait already heavily penalised. The man ot small means and large family is"already heavily burdened by the absurd system

of increasing- the Customs instead ol increasing the tax on larger incomes. "The land tax, seeing that onlj 18 000.000 acres .arc freehold, if increased would only mean that Additional income would be received trom a few. and already tho. graduated tax has boon substantially increased. Under such a system vou might penalise men who are'contributing their fair share to the country's revenue, and such a tax would not affect the Crown lands from which the bulk of the money is being made. An income tax, however, woultl affect people who receive increased revenue from their products, from mortgages or any other source, and these, "I "consider, should be made to pay over to the State a substantial portion of such increase. Take, for instance, the. man who had a largo amount of money out at interest at -5 or 5J per cent, but wbo, owing to the war, is now receiving 0 or 6$ per 1 cent. I hold that a largo proportion of that increase should go to the State. Another source of revenue could lie Found in amended succession duties, Instances could be given where wealthy colonists had died and left enormous sums to people residing outside the Dominion. I feel that the law should be so amended as to ensure that a larger percentage of such estates should go to the State. ''This conscription, of wealth," continued the member for . Ricearton. "should not apply to any olio .section of the community, but to all. J would not limit it to wool, meat, butter, and cheese, but would include merchan-

dise, clothing, higher rates, of interest, and the sale of' goodwills of Crown

lands. I would even go so far as to tax wealthy bachelors, who, under tho present scheme of taxation, are neither willing to contribute their fair share.

towards the revenue nor carry a rifle in the trenches. "There can be no doubt that the pre, sent system of taxation, voluntary and otherwise, presses unfairly on certain classes of the community. Men in the public service and in public positions, for instance, are asked' to contribute so much -weekly, and are virtually compelled to give for fear that otherwise their positions would be placed in jeopard v. While they are .hi this position no 'restrictions are placed on the merchant who without due warrant enormotislv increases the cost of living. Equality of sacrifice demands that .something should be done to rectify matters. Sugh men ;is those whom I have mentioned are called upon to pay something more than their fair share, hence the suggestion of conscription of wealth on a. fair basis. Certainly there should be nothing in the nature of confiscation so long as owners utilise their property to the best advantage, and" m case"of their failure to do so, it should be taken by tho State only on full compensation, being paid. That, in no sense of the term, could be called confiscation.''