J. CHRISTIE.]

79

8.—5.

Mr. Begg.] Was there anything specially in your mind when you suggested that ? —lt was really a suggestion from one of our members. I had not thought about it. Perhaps there is an aspect of this matter that you do not appreciate so much as we do in the, taxation. Take the railways, we working farmers are the men who keep your railways running. We are continually getting stuff by the railways and sending stuff away —fat lambs and so on —and we help to make the market for the pastoral-run holder by exporting our stuff. We pay a 40-per-cent. increase on pre-war rates for railage. I say that those people should contribute towards the upkeep of the railways, even if they do not use them. They should be using them. People, buy five hundred or six hundred ewes and derive an income from them. Those are the men. we think should contribute towards the cost of the, railways. Is not that done by the tax being on the unimproved value ? The man who does not improve his land pays the same tax as the man who does. Do you think that the theory of taxation on the unimproved value does not work out in practice ? —lt has not the effect that it should have. There is a big question involved there. The land should not be allowed to remain unimproved and unworked. Mr. Shirtcliffe : But is there not provision for 50 jjer cent, addition in the, tax ? Mr. Clark : If the land is not improved to the extent of £1 per acre, or one-third of the unimproved value, there is 50 per cent, additional tax payable. Witness : It can easily be improved to that extent. Mr. Begg : Is that put into effect to any extent ? Mr. Clark : Yes. Mr. Begg : How do you ascertain whether the land has been improved to the extent of £1 pier acre ? Mr. Clark : By the valuation rolls. Mr. Begg : But valuations are, made only once in five or seven years. Mr. Clark : Well, there is no stated interval, but if the improvements are there to that extent there is no question about it. Mr. Begg : And that valuation stands good until the next valuation : you have no means of ascertaining whether the land is being improved from year to year. Mr. Clark: If the valuations of improvements are not on the roll, and the occupier can produce evidence that he has effected improvements since, the improvements are put on to the roll whenever they are made, or shoulel be. Perhaps the occupier is frightened of his increase in his local rates. A good many of the owners do not have the improvements put on because they want to escape, the local rates, but still the majority have sufficient improvements put on. There are exceptions, and the penalty is applied in those cases. There, is back country which is really not capable of improvements to that extent. It woulel not pay to put improvements on tussock country to the extent of £1 an acre. Those lands are exempted. Mr. Begg.] I feel that there, is great difficulty in arriving at the unimproved value of land. That land might be improved to the extent of £1 an acre by fencing and ploughing. The occupier may get three crops of oats off second-class land and at the end of that time the land might be worth less with fences on it than originally ?—-(Witness) Yes, it might have depreciated. Can you make any suggestion as to how the assessment could be made in a fairer way ? —I do not know that I can in a case of that sort. It would be a case of a man having sufficient knowledge of the business. A practical man would have to make a personal inspection of each farm and see the improvements. Mr. Shirtcliffe.] Do the valuers go and make a personal inspection of each farm now ? —No, I do not think so. How do they arrive at their valuations ? —That is a mystery. I have seen two farms valued the same, though one was on the flat and the other rose into the lulls. The man whose farm was in the hills came before the Court and. objected to the valuation, and the, officials went up and looked at the place and found out the position. Ido not know whether it is possible for the valuer to make a personal inspection of each property. Mr. Clark : They are supposed to elo so.. Mr. Shirtcliffe.] You raised a very important question, that of the taxation of municipal enterprises. It is quite a new question. First of all, how would you differentiate or would you differentiate: between local-body enterprises and Government enterprises ?—lf you will excuse me, I do not want to go into those technical points. We just made that suggestion. You have not studied it ? —No. We suggested that these, matters might be inquired into. William Lee, Farmer, Goodweiod, near Palmerston South, examined. The Chairman.] I take it that the statement Mr. Christie has read expresses your views ?—Yes, sir. Do you wish to supplement that in any way ? —ln this way: lam a working-farmer. Unfortunately, during the last two or three years I have not paid income-tax. Before that I paid income-tax. And lam in the unfortunate position that Ido not pay a great deal of land-tax. I think I can speak from the pioint of view of a real working-farmer when I say that, he prefers the land-tax, because he can see that the elishonest man has no chance: of evading it, as he has with the income-tax. With respect to the income-tax on the average, farmer, it is the honest man that pays and the dishonest man that escapes. With the average working-farmer, if he keeps books they are very crude, and to him the filling-up of the income-tax paper is a nightmare—even to the honest man. I know of one case where a widow and her family were working, and eventually she got a business man to make up her income-tax return, and he found that she hael been paying hundreds of pounds that she should not have paid, that a business man would not have paid. With regard to the Crown tenants, it is news