REVENUE BUOYANCY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXVI, 22 December 1933, Page 5

REVENUE BUOYANCY

IMPROVING THE BUDGET PICTURE THE GOVERNMENT'S HOPES DEFICIT UNDER £2,000,000 (From “The Mail’s” Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, 21st December. The announcement that if the buoyancy of revenue was sustained—and there was every reason to believe this would be tho case —the Government should be able to improve upon the picture outlined in the Budget and complete the year with a deficit of less than £2,000,000, was made by the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates during the second reading debate on tho Appropriation Bill in the House of Representatives to-day. The Minister said that the revenue for the eight months ended 30th November amounted to £11,029,000, which was £1,971,000 g'-eater than received for the corresponding period last year. New items of taxation, the sales tax and the gold export duty provided £1,183,000 of the comparative increase. Continuing, he said: “Taxation receipts are generally in accord with the Budget estimates, although the position in regard to income tax will not be known until later. Apart from land and income tax, receipts are £46,000 in excess of the proportionate part of the estimate for the year, with the best period still to come. In regard to land tax the time for payment is now past, and I may say that receipts already to hand are up to tho Budget estimate for the year. Interest receipts and also certain of the items grouped under “other receipts” in tho estimates are not evenly spread oyer, the year. Allowing for these accounting fluctuations the receipts _ are in accord \Vith tho Budget estimutes, utki compare favourably with the ing receipts for the first eight months of last year, “The position in regard to expenditure is equally satisfactory. The amount for the eight months is £14,553,000, which is £1,614,000 less than the proportionate part of the estimate for the year. Comparison jn regard to debit charges, however, is upset by the fact that the item for debit repayment (£1,366,000) has not yet been drawn upon, and interest payments have this year been affected by conversion operations. On the other hand the lull year’s charge for exchange for normal purposes is already included. Departmental expenditure under votes is £353,000 loss than the proportionate part of the' estimates, and though few large special payments allowed for have yet to be made, the figures indicate that expenditure is being held within the carefully pruned estimates. The additional amount provided for by the Consolidated Fund in the Supplementary Estimates is £55,000 more than was allowed in the Budget, the total being swelled by llie additional amount lequired tor defence and unavoidable increase in hospital subsidies, and subsidy on fertilisers. I am confident, however, that the excess amount voted will be offset by savings in other lines and on other items, so that the aggregate amount ot the expenditure provided for in tie Budget, viz. £24,400,000, will not be exceeded. On the other band if the buoyancy in revenue is sustained, and there is every reason to believe tins will be the case, we should be able to improve upon the picture outlined in the Budget and come out with a deficit ot less than £2,000,000.”