The Ohinemuri Gazette. MONDAY, NOV. 21, 1910. A WORD FOR THE FARMER.

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

The Ohinemuri Gazette. MONDAY, NOV. 21, 1910. A WORD FOR THE FARMER.

During one of the taxation debates recently Sir W. j. Steward, the veteran member of the House, put in a word for the small farmer in respect of taxation. He raised the question of the propriety of taxing a man specially because he gains his livelihood by working on the land, and said : " I would treat income from whatever! source derived, whether from land or from business, in the same way." And this seems, at last, to have the merit of consistency. Of course,

another element comes in. The land

tax, at any rate the progressive land tax, has a political purpose as well as a revenue gathering object. Whether it is a good' purpose or an unwise one need not be discussed. It is the definite policy of the country, and is likely

to remain so. No responsible politician would suggest its repeal. But the ordinary land tax, Sir William Steward thinks, should be swept away and its taxing power for revenue purpose should

have, its scope in the income tax law. " I would retain," he said, " the progressive land tax, and I would do away with the ordinary land tax and put the farmer as regards taxation on exactly the same plane as the tradesman. If he made'an income of more than a year from his farm let him pay on that surplus income just as the grocer pays on the surplus he makes over £,300. Then if there were bad seasons and bad harvests the farmer would not pay income tax. If he had a good season and a good harvest he would pay on, that income in proportion to its amount." This is quite a proper and accepted principle. Whether it is a practical, workable scheme is another matter. Probably there would be a good deal of uncertainty and confusion on the holdings which are on the border line between ordinary taxation and progressive taxation, and we dare say it is a much simpler and less expensive matter for the taxing department to fix a man's contribution by the value of his holding than to get at his income. However,

this is the first time we have seen the matter seriously raised in Parliament, and it is of interest from that fact, though it may be doubted whether Sir William Steward would have many followers on a division. The same speaker had also something to say on the subject of distinguishing as they do in England between earnings from exertion and fixed income. Reading the English taxing schedules a colonial finds them decidedly confusing. He referred, too, to the equity of allowing exemptions or deductions to equalise the bur-

den as between the man with a large family and heavy demands on his in-

come for necessaries or the conveniences of life and the man with few calls on him. The theory is admirable, but the possibility of working it in practice is less apparent. The suggestion is that a man sending in a return of his income, besides claiming exemption for insurance premiums, should write off from the taxable amount a certain sum for each member of his family dependent on him. At the other end of the scale the speaker was decidedly drastic. In respect of anything a man had by way of income over ,£IO,OOO a year the member for Waitaki would not take a shilling or so in the pound, but onefourth. The over ,£IO,OOO men are few in New Zealand, hardly enouge to make the scheme worth while, but Sir William should put Lloyd George on to it. It would be quite a new terror tor

"the Dukes."