Manawatu Evening Standard. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1917. THE AMUSEMENT TAX.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLII, Issue 1015, 17 November 1917, Page 4

Manawatu Evening Standard. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1917. THE AMUSEMENT TAX.

Tiik disposition on the part of Government officials to ?;iterpret legislation in their own way, .and (particularly in the case of taxation measures), to proceed to extremes in levying upon the pockets of the public, has been again apparent this week, in a pretty little controversy that has been going on in the Wellington press fti connection with the Amusement Tax, which came into force on the first: of the mouth. The Amusement Tax Commissioner (-Mr P. I\ Corliss), in reply to questions a<lI dressed to him by a newspaper i nt rviewer, gave it. as hi.s opinion thai the new tax was chargeable Von subscriptions paid to athletic clubs ci till sorts, and that the liability extends to "every individual who pays his subscription to cricket, football, hockey, tennis, bowling or croquet clubs—indeed, to any club of the kind in which the subscription is a large enough amount to become taxable." Mr Corliss ■ further intimated that "it would bo his duty to collect the tax accordingly," and stated that the matter was "one for the individual and not for the club." In other words, the responsibility ol" paying the tax was to be thrown upon the members of the club. 11 the view taken by Mr Corliss could have Iveen upheld, the public would have been involved in all soils of trouble, and*, a somewhat absurd position would have resulted. The Corliss argument, or. idea, would relieve clubs collecting subscriptions from the responsibility of ] collecting the tax—which, if it had to I be levied, would be the only common sense way of obtaining it—and would | necessitate fifty or a hundred people (or even more, according to the strength of the club membership) making separate payments to the tax collectors, and a large amount of work would lie thrown upon the shoulders of the inspectors. The idea of taxing club members is altogether new. Jt formed no part of the original scheme of the Amusement Tax as propounded by Sir Joseph Ward, nor does it seem to have occurred to any of the critics of the Finance Hill of 1917 that any levy would be made upon club members in j respect of subscriptions paid by them. If such an intention had been suspected, strong opposition would certainly have developed against the proposal, because, as is well known, many members of athletic and sporting clubs subscribe to the funds of such clubs, not for the personal benefit they derive from their membership, but because they desire to see institutions of so virile a character maintained on a sound financial footing. To tax such peopleon their subscriptions would bo practically akin to taxing similar contribution made towards charitable purposes. As originally planned by the Finance

Act, the Amusement Tax was clearly intended to apply "only to "entertainments," such as theatrical performances, picture shows and Concerts, etc., and the original scheme provided for a lax of one penny on all payments exceeding sixpence, but not exceeding '2s Od, and then, on a graduated scale, of 2d up to os, 3d up to 7s Gd, (id up to l'Js fid, and, for payments in excess of 12s 6d, Is for the'first 12s 6d and Is for every 10s or part of 10s over 12s (id. The proposal outlined in tho Budget, to levy a tax of one penny on the first sixpence, was so clearly against the temper of the House, that it was not proceeded with, Radical members pointing out that it would seriously affect the pockets of the poorer members of the community, in such amusements as they could afford to patronise.