Untitled

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVIII, Issue 18573, 27 November 1920, Page 8

A little time ago the Wellington " Dominion ” and our looal morning contemporary tried to persuade their readers that Customs and excise taxation are considerably heavier in Britain than in New Zealand. We think wo succeeded in showing that they were wrong. However, we now have further evidence. By the last) mail we received details of the British revenue for tho six months ended last September. Customs and excise duties yielded £156,680,000. But for tho purpose of comparison with New Zealand quite £4,000,000 should bo deducted aa representing taxes and licenses that have no counterpart in the Dominion’s figures. Taking the population at fortysix millions (it probably is more) the Customs and excise taxation for the six months works out at £2.6 per head of the population. The New Zealand Customs and excise revenue in the same period was £4,661,000 and the estimated population, inoluding Maoris, at the middle of the period was 1,228,600, which gives an average of £8.7 per head for the half-year. This class of taxation, on the basis of the last six months, is therefore nearly 50 per cent higher in New Zealand than in Britain.

Another interesting comparison is the relation of Customs and excise taxation to the total revenue in each country. Britain’s revenue for the six months was £619,300,000, of which Customs and excise contributed 24.3 per cent, or less than one-fourth. Now Zealand’s total! revenue was £12,111,000, but to compare this against Britain’s tho railway receipts, £3,058,600, must bo deducted, leaving £9,057,400. The taxrevenue collected through the Custom House in New Zealand was, as already stated, £4,551,000, or more than half of the total revenue after omitting railway receipts in order to get a parity with Britain. Any member of Parliamen who chances to read this is invited to out it out for future reference.

The announcement in our " Commerce and Finance” columns to-day that the latest industry to be established in this country is the manufacture of margarino will not arouse a great deal of joy or enthusiasm in the breast of the nvorage New Zealander. Margarine, as the Germans would say, is "ersata” butter, and this country is one of the world’s largest butter producers. The appearance of margarine in the dietary of Now Zealanders is, of course, tho inevitable sequel to the very higli prices obtainable for butter. That butter should bo high in price is good for the dairy industry, but that margarine should take its place is not good, either for the daily industry or for the population of this country as a whole. It must he recognised, however, that at the present time margarine is sure of a market. In Britain, where in 1914-15 the population used 240,000 tons of butter and 197,000 tons of margarine, the consumption for 1919-20 was 130,000 tons of butter and 360,000 tons of margarine. Butter has been so scarce in the United Kingdom that the position is not surprising. It does not require the vision of a prophet of old, however, to foresee that the ultimate result will be bad for butter producers. Ruling high prices for butter are a great incentive to increased production, and when production overtakes the present world-shortage it will be found that the market for butter is not as largo ns it used to he, and that prices will have to he reduced drastically before the competition of margarine can b© combated.