The Star. FRIDAY, JULY I8, 1924. THE TAXATION COMMISSION’S REPORT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17345, 18 July 1924, Page 6

The Star. FRIDAY, JULY 18, 1924. THE TAXATION COMMISSION’S REPORT.

Nobody is satisfied with the present incidence of taxation in New Zealand, and therefore it is possible to find quite a lot of things in the Taxation Commission’s report that appear on the face of them to be highly desirable, but it is obvious also that the effect of many of the recommendations might be upset by factors that have not been anticipated. Following the total abolition of the land tax, for instance, it seems certain that the assessing of the farmer’s income from land would become a subject that would half's a Philadelphia lawyer, and would lead to endless trouble both to the taxpayer and to the Department. But there is one. conclusion that will receive almost universal endorsement, and that is the recommendation in favour of the abolition of the present system of company taxation. The method of applying the graduated income tax to companies as individuals was all right as a war-time expedient, but it taxed dividends and not income. The result was that in many cases numerous small shareholders, who might not have been liable for income tax on their aggregate incomes, were taxed through their dividends at the maximum rate, and even companies that were barely solvent were compelled to pay and look pleasant. The Commission proposes, by obtaining a comprehensive income census from all sources separately, to provide the data upon which to revert to the system of taxing the shareholder on his dividends as part of his general income. In the transition period it is proposed to impose a moderate flat rate on all profits of companies, with a temporary supplementary tax to make up the necessary revenue. These proposals are eminently reasonable, and the only pity is that under the Commission’s ambitious programme of a complete change over to “ a more ideally correct system,” this particular reform will have to await an income census and the necessary actuarial readjustments. Hie welfare of the country as a whole,” was trotted out by the Premier yesterday as a reason for opposing daylight saving, but he did not indicate how the moving forward of the clock was going to have an adverse effect on any section of the community. As a matter of fact, Mr Massey cannot understand the question, or he would have followed the lead of Britain, France, Belgium and other advanced countries. Bui, fortunately, Mr Massey’s opposition is not at all likely this session to defeat the Bill, in the lower House at all events. City members of Mr Massey’s party dare not oppose the almost universal demand for this reform, and those in favour of daylight saving should start at once to obtain pledges from individual members on the subject. Mr Isitt, we fancy, would find his loyalty to his anti-Labour principles too severely strained to fall in behind Mr Massey on this non-partj- question, and it may he taken for -ranted that the passage of the Bill is assured. And the more substantial the majority for the Bill, the less chance there will be of its ultimate defeat by that, obedient body of men, the Legislative Council.