DIRECT TAXATION

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 78, 25 June 1943, Page 4

DIRECT TAXATION

INCREASE CONSIDERED BEFORE BUDGET DISCLOSURE BY MR NORDMEYER (From Our Parliamentary Reporter)! Wellington, This Day. j The disclosure that before the Budget j was introduced this year, the Govern- | ment had considered seriously an in- l crease in direct taxation was made by the Acting-Minister in charge of the land and Income Department, Mr ] A. H. Nordmeyer, when speaking in the Budget Debate in the House of Representatives last night. The Minister said he had asked the department to prepare tables showing the effect of various increases, and it became obvious to the Government that any increases in taxation that would leave the taxpayer with a reasonable amount afterwards would not bring in a substantial additional amount of revenue. Therefore there was very reason for leaving the basis of taxation similar to that operating last year. Mr Nordmeyer said New Zealand’s taxation rates both in respect to income tax and social security and national security charges compared faY’ourably in most cases Yvith British and Australian rates. He thought it would be realised from examples which he would gWe that while New Zealand might possibly go up to the Australian rate, there was every justification for leaving rates where they were to-day. For the man with on income of £4OO who was married and had no children, the total direct tax paid in New Zealand, leaving out shillings and pence. Yvas £75. In Australia it was £7l. and in Great Britain £Bl. The taxpayer on £BOO in New Zealand paid £212, in Australia £232. and in Great Britain £261. In the case of the £I.OOO income, in New Zealand the tax was £290 in Australia £319. and in Great Britain £351. That was on earned income in * all cases. Mr Nordmeyer said that the tax on a £2.'JOO income in New Zealand was £782, in Australia £906, and in Great Britain £826. After quoting further examples the Minister said that the rate in New Zealand in most categories was lower than the Australian rate as amended some little time ago In reply to Mr G. W. Forbes <Nat., Hurunui) the Minister said he did not have figures showing a comparison of taxation in respect to unearned income. However, he added, they would be comparable in spite of New Zealand’s fairly high 33 1-3 per cent, increment.