The Timaru Herald. TUESDAY, NOV. 1, 1910.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIIC, Issue 14337, 1 November 1910, Page 4

The Timaru Herald. TUESDAY, NOV. 1, 1910.

OVER-TAXED. In view of the abounding 1 revenue shown by the Prime Minisier's own figures, .ioined with Sir Joseph Ward's new Bill to increase the graduated income tax, and his refusal to repeal the surtax on Customs duties imposed last year as a temporary expedient on the pretext of a falling; revenue, we think that a great manv people will agree with Mr T. E. Taylor. M.P., that the Dominion is being over-taxed. The figures which Sir Joseph Ward quoted in the House on Friday show that the revenue for the last seven months displays an increase of £57':.,042 as compared ■with the corresponding period c? last year. Ui' this amount, Customs duties are responsible in round numbers for £224,000, stamp duties for post and telegraph for £ll,l:{y. railways £luo.8!)5, and territorial £29,200. These figures afford evidence that the Dominion is enjoying a season of prosperity, hut, since a large proportion of the surplus comes from increased taxation, they also support the complaint of Mr Taylor that " by means of various taxes and charges we were taking from the pockets of the people large amounts of money which should remain with them for their use." At least it is very difficult to see why the Prime Minister, faced with a revenue so greatly in excess of his anticipations, and able, in the natural course of things, to look forward to an unprecedented surplus at the end of the present year, should require to seize a larger share of the higher incomes, and continue, in the surtax, an emergency imposition which presses on the poor as well as on the rich. In moving in the House on Friday that the surtax—estimated to produce £60,000 a year—should be abolished, Mr Massey said quite truly that if all the members spoke for a month they could give no better argument in favour of his motion than the figures which the Prime Minister had quoted. The net effect of those figures really is that whereas Sir Joseph Ward had estimated to have at the enu of this year a surplus of £727,000, he should be able to show a surplus barely short of one million pounds, since the best months of the year for revenue are to come. Mr Massey reminded the Prime Minister of his promise, when the surtax was imposed, nominally until March olst, 1911, that if the increasing revenue made necessary its earlier removal, it would not be continued for the full period. Sir Joseph Ward, however, though he finds at his disposal a revenue that has increased beyond his dreams, was of no mind to let go the £OO,OOO a year wrung, in emergency taxation, from the pockets of all classes of the population. He professed great as-tonishment-tit "Mr Massey's suggestion to repeal this special tax —although the House had just endorsed his request for a further £OO,OOO from incomes—and made vague reference to the expenses of the ''Dreadnought'' and the new scheme of internal defence. How hollow was this justification of the Government's rapacity two facts will show. When Sir Joseph Ward prepared his Pudget of a year ago, he allowed an I amount of £"530,000 for increased | expenditure from these and other causes, and arranged to meet it by new forms of revenue estimated to bring in £448,000, leaving him a balance of £IIB,OOO to play with—in his own words for "'unforeseen expenditure." Full provision was made, therefore, for meeting the requirements of Imperial and internal defence, and, so far as the expense of the "Dreadnought" was concerned.! I what does it amount to for the [present? As Mr James Allen pointed out, "there had been] £SOO as progress payment on the 'Dreadnought,"' and in the Estimates an increase of £22,000 was shown in the cost of defence this year. To meet these items the Prime Minister asked for £200,000." To this Sir Joseph Ward could only answer vaguely that the largest proportion of the cost would be in interest and sinking fund, but as the "Dreadnought" is not yet nearly built, these charges are not likely to be \ very heavy for the pjeiejrt*

It has been suggested that direct taxation is a salutary 'ray of paying- for the Dreadnought, because it makes the contribution o{ the "man in the street" immediate and specific, and so brings home lo him tlie sense of his responsibilities, but this argument can have no bearing' on the new income charges, which do not touch the man in the street, but only the man in a comfortable office. The following table showing the actual amounts paid per head of the population in taxation for a period of ten years will serve to show how the screw has been applied by the "Liberal" administration during a period of continuous prosperity:—

£ a. d. £ s. d. 1339 ... 3 13 3 1904 ... 4 S 4 1900 ... S 16 10 1905 ... 4 3 11 1801 ... 3 19 6 1906 ... 4 3 5 1902 ... 3 19 3 1907 ... 4 9 }0 1903 ... 4 1 8 1903 ... 5 0 4 The Government has taken, not a fixed proportion of the capital, which, with the growth of population, would yearly increase the total, but a larger proportion each year. _ Yet all this time there has been no reduction of borrowing, tjje public debt has gone on increasing, and now that the revenue is showing an unexampled surplus, there is not only to be no easing of the pressure, but a new instrument of extortion, in the form of a severer income tax Bill, has to be devised to produce more money for an extravagant administration. The public is patient and long-suffer-ing, but its patience will not be without an end.