GOVERNMENT VALUATIONS

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13654, 24 July 1908, Page 2

GOVERNMENT VALUATIONS

ARE T T ITY EXCESSIVE?

Speaking in 'ho financial debate in the Hou«o u. ... Mr Remington said tne Vahiiiiiuo department had not placed tl^.. t iL,-. .-a on properties. 'iliii. is uut-the opinion of eome property owners ;:: South Canterbury. A Timaru business man who has intimate relations with -a number of land owners, told a " Herald" reporter that in his opinion the system of arriving at'the'Government valuation was most unfair, and resulted in fictitious .values being put upon properties. It used to be the custom, he said, to value for taxation purposes at something less than market value. Nowadays any excuse is good enough for making the assessment as high as possible, whether the old practice is supposed still to be followed or not. If a man particularly wants a piece of land to round off a holding he already has, he may be willing to give a good deal more than the market price for it, and that was often done. Yeti the valuers treated that sentimental price as the market price, and raised the assessments upon it and upon all the land in the neighbourhood. Purchases of land for speculative purposes were often made at prices ' that would never be justified by future sales within a moderate number of years, but the prices given were taken as the basis of the Government valuations. The valuers were. congratulated' on having no objections to answer. They would have objections, Jots of them, if the Assessment Courts did not adopt actual sales, and high prices given for sentimental reasons, as their guide. It was no use an objector going to Court under such circumstances. He was met by the valuer with a ques-. tion " Didn't you give so and so for this land ?" or " Didn't your neighbour give so and so for adjoining land, no better than yours?" and an affirmative answer destroyed the objection for the Court. -lb was no use objecting in such cases. Yet. Ib was most unfair. Then the nominal price was taken as the cash price, whereas the nominal price might include very favourable-terms to the buyer. In one case, for example, a very high price waj given for a property, because the seller agreed to take a lease of it at a high rental. , Yet the stated price was taken as the fair market price, the valuation made accordingly, and the assessments of all surrounding properties were affected by'it. • The -Government were continually saying that taxation was not being, increased. The rate of the land tax might remain the same, but as the valuations were repeatedly raised, the owners had more money to pay as land tax. The increase had been rapid aiid considerable in towns of late years'. The 1907 amendment of the Land Act which made the owner of country lands his own .valuer compelled the larger owners to ask for assessments at rates considerably over market values, as a safeguard against- their lands being taken from them for settlement at a email percentage added 'to the assessment—-10 per cent, on the unimproved value up to £50,000 and 5 per cent, beyond thatamount, plus 2 per cent, on the total capital value. Bequests for increase of assessment on that ground had been made in this district.

The land tax .was now so important that it ought to be taken into account as a deduction from the value of the land. A person who bought land as an investment for his money looked to get a return from it as' interest; the land tax diminished that return, and reckoned in terms of interest it represented so nvucn. of the capital. value.tihat was, so to speat, the State's interest, in the property and this ought to be allowed for and deducted from Die valuation for taxation purposes. What was true for the purchaser for investment, was of course true also tor aU "land odwners. The man who farmed Jim own land looked upon some of Jus annual protit<' , IS interest, on the value ot his land. ~ . The increase of valuations would not( signiiv if the rate of the land tax were reduced, but there was no reduction of ;ate, and tha total amount collected was consequently growing with each valuation. I ae amount collected last year -was.sufficient for all demands; ithe same amount then should be sufficient this year, but, the land tax was growing and helping to an undue extent to make 'the big annual surpluses. One does not hear much gruir.uling about< it, the reporter suggested. -.-; ere is not much public grumbling, bee. *e the taxpayers see that grumbling wj< id be no iise as the Government! has no i.>. n.pathy with the land-owner; bub they i'..» ginimble among themselves a good <icai. The ■Government were the pronouti-co enemy of big landowners, consequently V; was no wonder that many of ihem wen .Peking to acqun-e properties' in Australia v.-iiere they would be welcomed* Sir Ward, when told the other day ta=-.r -Mr Ormond had laid out 3360,000 in said he was pleased to hear it, .\e\v Zealand did not want such men. That remark was a st'iraw that showed whkh way tha wind blew with the Government regarding land ownership. It may be well to add, by way of explanations of t.ie reference to the 1907 Land Act, at the outset of these remarks, that clause 81 provides that when any land is taken compuLsorily under ,the Land for Settlement Act, the compensation to be paid shall be, j.i respect of the unimproved value of tin- land, the amount at which this value i.-; assessed in the district valuation roll (Government valuation) at the time when the requisition for the taking of the land was gazetted, plus 10 per oant. on that valim up to £50,000 and 5 per cent, on any amount in excess of £50,000, and plus 2 per cent, upon the capital value, '.f a landowner thinks that his. land may be taken. from, him under the Land 'or Settlement Act, and thinks the Gover.'..-ne.it valuation of .the unimproved valuL too lowj he may at certain times give -<■-> ice to the Valuer-General that he requ:>s such valuation to be increased to an ..mount named in the notice, and the Value; -General is required thereupon to increa.-e the assessment accordingly and to make a corresponding increase in the capital value of the property. These increases are to be entered in a "supplementary " valuation ; roll, and this roll is to be used for the computation of land tax and death duties, but not for local rating purposts. The notices referred to can only be given in the month of March in any one year or in connection with the revision of the valuation roll of the district: in which the property is situated.