BUDGET PROPOSALS

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 81, 10 August 1929, Page 5

BUDGET PROPOSALS

, SUPER LAND TAX. , PROTEST BY FARMERS. MEETINGS HELD. -, WELLINGTON, Last Night. Protests were, made by many farmers' meetings ijo-day_aga.i.ns.t the proposals regarding super land tax and mortgage exemption put forward by the Government in the Budget. In his l. reply to one protest tho Prime Minister, the Rt.. Hon. Sir Joseph Ward, stated the, suggestion that £BOO,OOO additional burden would! be thrown on the landowner was incorrect. ' Tho Prime Minister received the following telegram from the Canterbury Sheepowners' Union: "My executive unanimously passed a resolution Strongly protesting against the proposed! legislation for a super land ' tax and mortgage exemption. "The. opinion was expressed that the tjifect wouTd ' he disastrous on many farmers with equities of from £SOOO to £15,000 in farming lands with mortgages covering the. balance of the value. Unemployment would be accentuated through the necessity to reduce, expenses; to meet the extra) taxation, if levied:. We trust an opportunity will be allowed farmers to and others interested to .place the position before you prior to the alteration of the law." VIEWS TO BE CONSIDERED. Sir Joseph replied: "I shall give your organisation the fullest opportunity of placing your views before me before proceeding with the legislation.

"I desirq to point out to you that yq'u evidently have been misinformed as to how the proposed change in the incidence will operate. The alteration in the mortgage tax will affect 505 landowners and the change in the incidence of income tax will affect 1650.. The suggestion that £BOO,OOO extra burden is to be thrown on the landowners is incorrect and has no foundation whatever in fact. However, ample time will be given yon to make yonr representations." The WellinGtom provincial executive of the Farmers' Union to-day adopted a. resolution that the proposed super tax on the unimproved value of .land should start at £20,000 instead! of £12,500. Tire executive also protested against 'income tax being imposed as an alternative in a, good ye.ar.. Spenders 'claimed that the "ftidaetjj proposals were, the severest blow the farmers bad ever j-eceivedl. One said the farmers would, retrench and thus swell.the unemployed ranks. PROPOSAL CONDEMNED. After considerable discussion in which the Budget proposals were roundly condemned 1 , the mid-Oa.uter-bury executive of the Famrers' Union protested against the proposals of the. Government in, regard to the increase of taxation in land, "as in our opinion such, proposals would have the effect of decreasing rather than increasing the number of men | on the. land!. \

"There is no doubt the lowering of mortgage exemptions will setriously affect a large number of farmers who are, only just recovering from the effects of the slump, and we would respectfully suggest; iProtn an economic viewpoint a retrenchment. in expenditure'would be of greater service to this country than iucrea*ing taxation." A meeting of farmers and those interested in stock and station business was held) at Ohristchurch to-day to discuss the Government's proposals. After discussion it was agreed that a direct result would he a general reduction of land values affecting all farmers, serious depreciation of mortgages' securities and increased taxation on a large number of farmers with small incomes through the reduction of mortgage exemption. It Vivas unanimously agreed that the object sought by the Government could be reached by abolishing the land "fax an<H imposing s, general income tax, however earned, and graduated as required. Any subdivision thought to he necessary by the Government, it was agreed, could be brought about where necessary under existing povveivs as laid down in tho compulsory resumption clauses of the Act, Numerous cases were cited of pro--1 perties, the owners of which failed to obtain a reasonable return on their investment and yet would have the tax djoubled.

One wm a'farmer holding property worth £28,000, land unsuitable for subdivision because, of the enormous cost involved. The total income received by this owner in the past throe years after land tax and other charges had heen paid did not exceed £3OO. His land tax was £261. Under the proposed scale it would be £504. This, owner was unable to save himself by subdivision or sale except at a heavy loss.. Numerous other cases were given. The Tima.ru Agricultural and Pastoral Association to-dav passed the following resolution : "That this association, representing the farming community between the Rangitata and Waitahi Rivers, 'disapproves of the Government's raising taxes as. at present suggested in the Budget, and thinks it could he done on a more equitable basis,"-