The Daily News MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1929. NEW LAND TAXES.

Taranaki Daily News, 30 September 1929, Page 8

The Daily News MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1929. NEW LAND TAXES.

The Taxation Bill having passed its second reading by a large majority, it seems certain that it will become law. There is still the opportunity for amendment in the committee stage, and even its supporters must admit there is room for improvement in the construction of the measure. The Prime Minister has admitted this in regard to the “hardship clause,” which is a very important feature. With the principles underlying the Bill of raising taxes from those best able to bear them, and of bringing about closer land settlement, there can be little to cavil at. It is the method of their application that is questioned, and with undoubted cause. In raising the limit from which the supertax on land is to commence from the £5OOO originally proposed to £7500, and by a similar proposal in regard to mortgage exemption, Sir Joseph Ward, went a good way towards meeting the objection to the land taxes proposed. What he has failed to do is to justify the proposed dual form of taxation which is to apply to rural lands. After a certain limit of value is reached land owners are to pay income tax or super land tax, whichever may be the greater. In a good year a heavy impost will be placed upon income; in a poor year the heavy land tax will still have to be paid. So far'the Minister’s principal reply to the criticism that this is unfair is the assertion that it will affect only a few landowners who can well afford to pay either tax. But injustice is iniquitous, whether it applies to few or many, and it is the justification of the dual system and not a description of the scope of its application that is required if criticism is to be effectively answered. It is true there is a “hardship clause” in the Act under which a taxpayer who feeds he has a grievance may appeal against his assessment either • nder the land or income tax. The appeal will be heard by a commission which will make recommendations to the Commissioner of Taxes. Should the commission’s finding, oi the Commissioner’s ruling, be unsatisfactory to the taxpayer, he may then appeal to Parliament- Judging from the efficacy of appeals to Parliament, especially in matters of administration, it would be an optimistic taxpayer who placed | much faith in this mode of obtaining redress. It was pointed out in the House that the real power remains with the Commissioner of

cratic rule is to obtain. No one questions the probity of the State official, but it is his duty to see that whatever taxes are permitted by the law are duly collected, and unless his functions under a hardship clause in a taxing law are made as clear as is his duty to collect whatever taxation the law allows, he is bound to take the strictly legal view of any appeal that may come before him. It is presumed the Government has a fair estimate of what increase in revenue is. likely to accrue from the dual system of taxation. If it is a large one it would seem an argument for the substitution of income tax for farmers in lieu of land tax. If it is a small one there seems less reason than ever for the retention of clumsy taxation machinery. But apart from the question of political sagacity, and of far greater importance, is the question whether the proposal is just. It is one that is still awaiting a reply from the supporters of the new system.