TAXATION OF FARMERS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 16013, 3 September 1915, Page 6

TAXATION OF FARMERS.

PROPOSALS IN BUDGET. "TOWN VERSUS COUKTBI.*, MINISTER OFFERS COMPABISOX^? OSX TEtEGBAPH.— TZSSS ASSOCIATIoy.] ? ; Weixixgtgx. ThursdaT ''' ; Is the House of *i^_ ._ ... " »»M US23 afternoon Sir Joseph Ward moved to wi on the table of the Eosse a return p-i nrised to Mr. Anstey the previous evening. He said the reason he was proincing the return was that some members wanted to know why the Government proposed, in the Budget, that the increase in the graduated land tax shoaij apply to country bads and not to citv lands. The returns showed thai adsal payments by business sen in the iowia amounted to £27,000 and by country men to £5301. In the return the pa-rajents shown were land and income tax." as ja the Budget, paid on properties of eqnal [ value in town and country, and were at ! follows:— ~

Grand totals — .£23,695 £5-83. Mr. G. V. Pearce said the return was ■wide of the point- at issae. The paper dealt with, the payment of land and inocs» tax in towns, imt to give the Masse tfcg necessary information it sbc-nld deal with the land tax alone. The Budget proposals ■were going to hit the small farmer very hard. It was the man with the mortgage, not the man with the money, who wait asked to pay. The war tax should be paid oat of war profits, and the wa- to do that was to tax the land. It was iniDossible to discover the income of small farmers, and the proposal to tax those incomes was most nastatesmaElike.

Mr. H. G. Ell (Christehsrch Sooth) said that the proposal lo tax the tanner en Ms income was a fairer proposal than to tax him on Lis land, as it hit the man who had held his wheat back and obtained the good prices, bat did not fait the man who had Been compelled to sell si 3s 68. per busheL Position of the City Mas. Mr. CL. J. Parr (Eden), who put the ca?% from the point of view of the div tax- , payers, said that a man paying mcoma tax on an income of £43.000 would, under the proposed income tax, pay £6500 a year, as against £5330 a »>reseni- If ha were called upon to also pay the increase in the graduated land tax, he woald h**» to pav only £73 16s Id more. He be- * Eeved that the man with the incojEewodd willingly pay this comparatively small extra amount than have all this" bother. v A man with an income of £975) wooM : now have to pay £1500 in the income tax, instead of £650. If he had to pay the, increase in the graduated land tax as ' well, he would have to pay only £29 more. The proposed increase" in land tax was so ridiculously small that it was ■unworthy of saeh a protracted debate. After all the proposed increase in the land tax would bring in only £74,000. This was the only extra taxation that the country lands . would be called span to? pay. Contest thi3 with the value of thai proposed increase ,in the f incense fax ;of 1 £351-000, which world be mainly collected from residents of the towns-. Tins increase was greater than the total of She income ! tax paid at present. ; , - v Mr. J. A. Young (Waikato) who pre. sented the "fanners" pent of view, contended that the return submitted hv the Minister for Finance did not give a fain? idea of the incidence of taxation, inasmuch '":- as it did not show the amount of neft income upon which the figures in each east were based.' •"" - ~_- z •'. Wi

"An "Honest; Attempt." | The Prime Minister deprecated the cry of town against country, and asked the ' " House to remember that it -was difficult It to bring down a perfect Budget at a time : such as this. An honest attempt had been made in that direction, and he did nos' agree with the statement that the worker got off scot fee.. Sicca the Bsdzet ad been delivered he had had the oppbrtoniiy of- meeting ' manv, tho-."-: dncers, and he had been gratified* to * find so little objection to the proposals. Although the increases in taxation were, in some cases, heavy, very few farmers would > be called upon to pay tho&e increases. = There ■were men ■who were supposed '. to"' have made fatbmes out of ■war prices, but ■■...■ if so, the 'war tax would reach those;, people. '•; ''*&'*. The Minister for Finance, Sir Joseph Ward, said thai the retain had been laid 1* on ..the table for the purpose of showing _. that the operation of £ the' graduated land tax in cities would hare a disastrous effect. 5r This -had been introduced originally to ? t " burst ap big estates, bat 3 feey started to burst up town oroperties they would r: simply 1 succeed m bursting up business. At present, the within £10,000 L£ of half fee total sraKzat of the graduated ,- tax paid, and that was as "much as he thought they could do at present. On the other hand, the income tax on the country settler was ranch easier than ths income tax pa the merchant, so easy* is fact, that- only two farming members of;;"-" fee House would have to "pay it. He had V discussed the question of fa-rmjT -war ; ? profits with many people, and he bad come _ to the conclusion that this conld not be ?;.-,- done. It was not so with the income tax. The Departmt'nt could get all the necessary information in a lew weeks. The money asked for most be found, and the,., fairest way was to get at the incomes ofpeople who had made large war profits. - The paper was hud on fee table, and : the fiouss adjourned.

TJ-zizz Business Business Basses Fzna. proved man. rssn. eu, Tr-ui ■caiae. income la=d total tax/ tax. lax. tax. £ - — £ # 7.S60 252 3S 2S3 as 12X71 52« 12 541 4? =3,634 2-825 5;5 3-374 eg 6OS50 1.373 415 1.790 =3? 17.407 735 101 S57 §f SO90 6S1 IS 635 i| 26.509 £38 IPO 719 i|S 10.533 462-49 511 « 54.491 853 S3 733 » 81.9S5 397 937 134 Ug 16.563 455. S* $39 £1 23.534 S89 54 S44 ft 38,789 3.330 321 3.521 3S -29.953 1,859 214 2-074 - £i 85012 861 155 1.&43 Ha 103.441 L3SS 1,634 3,030 «n« 12.544 1.667 66 1,733 65