NEW LAND TAXATION.

Waikato Times, Volume 106, Issue 17802, 29 August 1929, Page 2

NEW LAND TAXATION.

MR YOUNG’S CRITICISM. HARDSHIP ON FARMERB, SETTLEMENT POLICY. “I only heard to-day from a gentleman who owns a fair area of land that under the new proposals more than GO per cent, of his earnings will go in increased taxation. ’there is something wrong about that,” said Mr J. A. Young, M.P. for Hamilton, in his speech in Parliament opposing the Government’s proposal for a higher graduated land tax. He went on to point out that it was necessary to have a large area lo make farming pay on poor country. He added: “Whatever legislative proposals may be made affecting land, income and industry generally should be on such lines as are fair and reasonable and give opportunity to the man with capital to apply his wealth to bring unproductive areas into use so as to build up the wealth and prosperity of the country. One of the factors contributing to the unemployment problem to-day is the threats held out to people with land or wealth, making them afraid to spend their money to bring the land into use. What we ought to do is to encourage people to spend their money in that way. Wherever there is a landowner bringing in new- land, or putting his land to its best use, we should by all means encourage him. The Minister of Lands said that the number of applications made to the Government to purchase land amounted to no fewer than 569. Of the properties thus offered 340 had been declined, 215 were under consideration, and 14 had been purchased. The Minister complained that the prices asked were too high. But it is useless for the Minister to shelter himself bisaying that the prices asked are too high, because there is ample legislation on the Statute Book giving the Government power to purchase land compulsorily—not at the price asked by the vendor, but at the price fixed bv a competent court.” Mr Young went on to defend the late Government’s plan for development of 10,000 acres of pumice country, as the beginning of a scheme for extensive settlement in that region. Group Settlement. “The legisialion of the Reform Government placed upon the Statute Book in 1928 regarding group settlement,” said Mr Young, “provided all the machinery for very successful setllemenl, and 1 shall lie surprised il 1 it is nol, at a very early date, made good use of, because if provides a scheme whereby a number of persons who see land capable of settlement, or land which can be' subdivided to advantage, can arrange with the vendor tentatively Lo take up such land. They can then go to the Lands Department and set out their plan or scheme of anticipated settlement, and there is all the machinery to enable the Government to finance them on to that land, without the Government having to take the risk of purchasing it, with consequent roading cost's, subdividing costs, etc. Then, fu-ther, in the message published by\ the late Prime Minister, he had a policy containing a plan of homes and small farms for country workers.” Election Promises.

“Members of the Government party, prior to the election, made a great boast that if they were returned to power they would be able to borrow money and lend it out at very cheap rates of interest- —iper cent., for instance- —and do all sorts ol" tilings, without increasing the cost lo the people of lliis country. I have before me a circular i. ucd and sent all over Ih e country by the United Party prior lo the elections. It is headed "United Party for Permanent Prosperity— Ncw'zcaland's Salvation,” and it says:

" ‘Sir Joseph Ward, world-famous financier, will raise £70,000,000 (seventy millions sterling) without cine penny additional taxation, direct or indirect —£60,000,000 for loans lo farmer.; and workers, £10,000,000 lo complete our main trunk lines.'

“During the election campaign | honourable members on this side of j the House pointed out that it was absolutely impossible to borrow money to that extent and handle it without cost to the taxpayers in some shape or form. What do w e And to-day? Here in the first Budget presented we find proposals for an increase in taxation —an all-round increase to provide an amount beyond the total deficit in the -past year's financial operations. At the present time there a primage duty of i per cent, on practically ail goods imported. ‘•lt is estimated that this increase in Customs duties will cost the people something like £IOO,OOO. Wc have been told that the traders will pay this duty, and I have been surprised to find that some people believe that. I feav that the traders will be the taxgatherers for the Government in connection with this primage duty. The trader will add it to the landed cost of his goods, and to that added cost he will add a certain percentage of profit, and the final amount arrived at will be the price at which the goods will be sold to the public. It seem 3 clear to me that the traders can and will pass on the duty; the storekeepers and the importers can pass it on, but the farmer cannot pass on taxation, because he has to accept for the goods he produces the price fixed by competition in the world's markets." Mr Parry: "What would the hon. member suggest in its place? Mr Young: “There is no need for this primage duty at all. The estimate of revenue for this year is £1,572,324 more than the actual receipts for last year. You do not need £1,572,000 to make up for a deficit of £577,000. 1 am convinced that, with proper control of expenditure, there is no need for this primage duty at all. it means an increase in the dost of living. If taxation is to be taken from the pockets of flic people for a specific purpose it should, if at all possible, lie in the form of direct taxation, so that those who pay may know what it is for.”