TAXATION.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5562, 25 January 1879, Page 3

TAXATION.

111. (Contributed.) In a former paper I assumed that the general prosperity of n country depended principally, if not wholly, on the extension of its industries and on the general development of its natural resources, and consequently that taxation should be so levied as to interfere in the least possible degree with such development. I further observed that there is a very wide difference made by the manner in which taxes are imposed. Interests may be affected on the progress of which the general weal depends. An injury would be inflicted on those vital interests by the imposition of a heavy tax on agricultural machinery and implements, as against the imposition of the same amount on luxuries. This leads up to the consideration of those things which should not be taxed because of the important part they play in the development of our chief industries. If the proposition be sound—that is, politic—to remove all cheeks and obstructions'to the expansion of our industries, and to give the fullest play for the most economic development of our natural resources, it follows that exemp, tions should, in the public interest and for the common good, extend to all kinds of things that would lessen or would assist labor. It is by labor alone, in some form or other, which our industries, on which the general weal depends, are carried on. We should try to reduce the cost of production to the lowest possible point, and thereby widen the area for the profitable exercise of labor. To achieve this it is necessary that all kinds of material, machinery, and mechanical appliances, the application of which would lessen the cost of production, should clearly be exempt from taxation. Of all forms of machinery by which our industries are carried on, manual labor and skill are the most necessary and important, all other machinery being only auxiliary to it. Hence it is clearly in the public interest that all the necessaries of life should be free. If it would be suicidal to impose a tax on agricultural machinery and implements, how much more suicidal is it to impose a tax on the great manual machine by which alone all others can be constructed and utilised. In my comparing the laborer to a machine, let it not be understood that I look down on, or speak disparagingly of the laborer, even of the commonest sort. If there is one class of men in this country whose possessions I envy, it is that ;class that possess a sufficiency of well developed bone and muscle that enables them to do a heavy day’s manual labor without material inconvenience to themselves.

X do not feel called upon here to state what the necessaries of life are, but leave that question to the Legislature, which, in this country at least, means the people themselves, and confine myself to the proposition that any tax on the necessaries of life must be prejudicial to the public weal. Any such tax interferes with the most important part of that machinery by which our industries are carried on. It must therefore of necessity check the progress and extension of those industries on which the general prosperity of the people at large depends. As an act of common justice to the lower paid class of laborers, who form so important an element in : the wealth producing power of the State, the comforts and conveniences of life should be as lightly touched by taxation as possible, so as to place them within the reach of all classes. If all our industrial appliances, including the necessaries of life, are to be relieved from taxation, while the comforts and conveniences of life are to be lightly touched, from whence or from what, it may be asked, are the necessary State funds to be obtained. I have assumed that they should bo drawnfrom such sources and in such a manner as to interfere in the least possible degree with the development of our Industries. One of these sources I hold to be all articles of luxury ; firstly, because such contributions would not in any way partake of a class character, or bo at all compulsory, but would be practically voluntary contributions, because no one need pay anything unless they choose to do so, and only just as much or as little as they please ; secondly, because you could scarcely fix on any other thing, or take money from any other source, that would interfere to so small an extent in the progress of our industries. A surplus only is taken beyond what persons require for other and more necessary purposes. Therefore the tax on luxuries should bo so fixed os to secure the largest amount of revenue. I do not mean to say that a high rate of tax on any given article of luxury necessarily means a correspondingly larger amount of revenue, because a much lower tax, and the consequent increased consumption, might produce the larger revenue. (To lie continued.)