RATING ON UMIMPROVED VALUES.

Ohinemuri Gazette, Volume XXI, Issue 2721, 21 November 1910, Page 2

RATING ON UMIMPROVED VALUES.

(To the Editor.)

Slß—The practibihty, beneficence, and justice of this system appear quite obvious and certain to those who have considered in any degree what the system actually purports to effect. Allow me to briefly outline the statutory enactments which give authority for this system. "The Rating on Unimproved Value Act, 1896," was passed by Parliament to aftord local bodies the opportunity of adopting this principle of rating. This Act is now incorporated in " The Rating Act, 1908." It is entirely at the option of the local bodies, and provision is made whereby a return may be made to the old system it, after three years' experience, the new one is found undesirable. The proceedure to be adopted is as follows :—The proportion of the ratepayers on the roll, varying irom 25 per cent, where the total number does not exceed 100, to 15 per cent where the number exceeds 300, may by demand in writing or petition delivered to the chairman of the local

County Council or Borough require the proposal to rate property on the basis of the unimproved value to be submitted

to the ratepayers, whose votes shall be taken between 21 and 28 days after the delivery of the demanti. The question of adoption or otherwise 13 decided by a bare majority of the valid votes recorded, irrespective of the number of ratepayers who have voted. The poll is to be taken in exactly the same manner as in case for a proposal to raise a loan in the County or Borough under " The Local Bodies Loans Act, 1908." The adjustments are to be made so that the rates on the unimproved value shall be such as to produce as much as, but not more, than the rates under "The Rating Act,

1908." For instance, supposing a local authority has rating power up to Jd in £ on the capital value ; then it can levy any rate in the £ on the unimproved value of land in its district so long as the producing capacity of such rate is not greater than would be the nroducing capacity of i|d rate oh the capital value of the district. The fact that over 100

local bodies in New Zealand have adopted this system of rating should be a sufficient indication that the system has much to commend itself. It pro-

vides in its inherant working for reward to the industry of the people. That property should remain in an unimproved state year after year and bear no taxation of any description, while its value is

continually increasing owing to improvements having been effected on the surrounding and adjoining properties, is sufficient to warrant the consideration of those who are presumed to have at least some conception of economic distribution. Paeroa alone presents a striking illustration ,of the immediately foregoing statement. The results of the system are many—firstly, there is a proportionate decrease on the rates paid on improved values, v^nich are at, present levied ; secondly, it provides an incentive for improving land by buildings or otherwise; thirdly, it tends to prevent

the indefinite holding' of property for personal and speculative purposes ; fourthly, it will encourage settlement; fifthly, it will prevent fictitious land values. With these very few observations I feel confident that the ratepayers of the Ohinemuri County will be only too willing, if gfiven a favourable opportunity, to adopt such a system as has been above indicated.—l am, etc., T. E. Shaw.