The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 1918. THE BRITISH BUDGET

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIII, Issue 9954, 25 April 1918, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 1918. THE BRITISH BUDGET

Time was —an-d.noi.eo very long before the -war either—when the first hundredmillion Budget caused no little surprise and concern in the Old Country. To-day Mr Bonar Law budgets for six to seven times that amount, and provides for 67 millions (or is it 114 millions, as stated in another cable?) of new taxation; but the Colossal figures occasion no surprise, and, so accustomed have we become to doing big things in a big way, apparently very little concern. "The House of Commons agreed to the Budget resolutions," is the terse, the commonplace conclusion of the long cablegram announcing these enormous Budget figures. The total tax receipts during the past financial year, -no are told, were £613,040,000, an increase of £43,340,000; while the receipts from all sources totalled £707,235,000,; an increase of £68,635,000-. The chief increases in taxation wore—Customs, £511,000; excise duties, £3,722 > 000; estate duties, £2,674,000; income tax, including supertax £15,509,000 (£21,500,000 states another message); excess profits duty, £20,214,000; land duties, £285,000. A notable item of revenue is tho £30,000,000 excess profits tax from Statecontrolled firms, which suggests that by Government control of production, or, alternatively, by commandeering produce, Now Zealand might have realised a very considerable revenue from war profits to help pay for tho war. So much for the present, for the revenue side of the account. Tho figures i on the expenditure side arc even more | colossal —stupendous, in fact. The acj tual expenditure for the past year, at the rate of £6,986,000 per d'ay, compared with £6,583,000 a day in 1016, totalled no loss than £2,403,000,000. To tho end of 1916 the money raised for war expenditure was £1,044,000,000 • to the end of 1917 the amount j'raised was £1,986,000,000. "These figures," rightly declared the Chancellor of tho Exchequer, "proved the country's financial strength after four 1 years of -war—nrach greater than could have been anticipated V-and were an amazing testimony to the country s financial strength. , ~ .. Ae for tho new taxation, while the excess profits duty remains unchanged and tho income tax on incomes under £SOO a year is also unchanged, above that amount the income tax as raised at 6s in tho £l, with a super-tax of 4s 6d in tho £l, beginning with incomes of £2500. Farmers are required to pay income tax on twice their rent —a tacit assumption that on tho average one-third of the farmer's not income, after meeting all other expenses, goes in ront!—otherwise they must render accounts. Tho tobacco duty is raised from 6s 5d to 8s 2d per lb, the duty on spirits to 30s per gallon, and that on beer to 50s per barrol; while the sugar duty is increased by lis 8d per hundredweight, involving a riso in prieo from 53d to 7d lb; tho tax on I matches is increased, and a luxury tax I of 2d in the Is, similar to that in Iforco in France, is imposed. The in-

creased spirit duty.* is expected to yield £11,000,000; the beer duty, £15,000,000; the tobacco tax, £8,000,000; the match.tax, £600,000; and tho sugar tax £13,200,000. "Taxation," said Mr Bonar Law, "had been increased tinder every heading" ; but the context shows that he meant by this that the, receipts from taxation had been increased under every beading—a somewhat' .different' matter. That tho receipts from taxation show an allround increase- is, no doubt,; quite correct; but it certainly is not.true that "taxation has been increased under every heading." Thcro is at least one very noteworthy exception. Tho land duties we arc "told show an increase" of £255,000. 'But that, as compared with the huge land values of the Mother Country, does not even amount to tho proverbial "drop in tho bucket." As a matter of fact, in not one of Britain's four War Budgets has so' I much as one penny-pieco been added Ito the old land tax or to Lloyd George's land duties. Tho old land I tax, levied nominally at tho rate of 14s in the £l, but failing on tho values of 1692, even then under assessed, I not upon the values of 1918, yields only somo £600,000 a year, or about tho same as the Jd tax on matches! While it is doubtful whether the laud tax and the, land duties combined yield more than a million a year, or some £250,000 less than our New Zealand land taxes, though tho unimproved annual value of tho United Kingdom must be from 50 per cent, to 100 per cent, greater than the unimproved soiling value of the land of this Dominion.

Recently, when questoned in the House of Commons on the matter, Mr Bonar Law stated that he saw no hope of getting a greater revenue from the landtaxes. A passage ia his Budget speech, with regard to the position in Germany, possibly throws isoruo light on this -sctraordiraary statement. Germany's daily expenditure, said Mr Bonar Law, was £0,250,000, as against our £6,980,000 a day, and her war debt aggregated £6,200,000,000, as compared with our £7,980,000.000. But he added, Germany's new taxation aggregated £365,000,000 only, as against Britain's £744,000,000; Germany's war debt would be £8,000,000,000, and her deficit would be a minimum ofr £358,000. Her new taxation, indeed, would not be sufficient to pay interest on her war debt. "If. our case were the 6ame," 'declared the Chancellor of the Exchequer, "Britain would not be far from bankruptcy"; and he stated that "Germany imposed no direct taxation"—(the •'indirect" in the cable is on obvious slip)—"because the only- classes which had any influence in. 'the Government were wealthy people whom the Government were afraid to tax." , Surely, then, I we are entitled to assume that the big land monopolists at Homo hav« so much influence in the Government that the Government are afraid to tax them as such. To avoid stirring up strife, and to secure the utmost unity of action for the winning of the war, the British people may bo prepared—they very evidently are prepared—to stand this sort of -thing for the duration of the war. But. after the war is over, especially when it becomes a question of securing for those who have fought for "thencountry," a bit to call their own. ot the country they have fought for; and when it becomes necessary to force into use millions of idle acres to find house-room and employment for the millions of idle hands; then, surely, the people of Great Britain will insist that the big land monopolists shall pay their fair share of the interest and sinking fund charges on the cost of the war, ■> and that they shall cither use their,idle acres themselves or part With them to those who will use them. And what about this Dominion P Our land tax m New Zealand has; it is true, been slightly increased, but , that increase is a mere nothing to the great rise in land values here since the war began; and here, as at Home, if wo are to find land on reasonable terms for our returned soldiers,' if we are not to he confronted ihy a ,very serious unemployed problem when onco the walls over, our land taxes must be so increasod ns to make th 6 big land monopolists pay their full, fair share of the cost of the war, and compel those of them who are holding land idle either to use it themselves or port with it to the returned soldiers and others who will use it.