101

J. I). llall.J

8.—5.

facts, but if theories are any good at all—well, I have a theory. It is based on the experience of farming here for some time, and it is based a little on the experience of farming in England for two or three years. The Chairman.] We shall be glad to have your theory ? —My theory is that you have got to alter this land-tax. In what way ? —I do not wish to wipe it out, but the land-tax is inequitable, because it taxes a man whether he makes a profit or whether he does not, and it taxes him on his debts. The method 1 suggest is that you shall have a flat rate of land-tax, and you shall make alle)wance for mortgages, and that the rest of the revenue that is in fairness required from the farming community shall be in ae:cordance with a man's —I see Mr. Clark is quoted as describing it as "faculty." When it got down here it was reported as " facility." That is a most unfortunate thing, because, facility on the part of the Commissioner is not a reason at all from our point of view. But to tax the; farmer according to his faculty or his ability to pay is a fair thing. You have got to make that up from what he earns, and that is what I think is a fair thing. Tax him on his income:. Mr. Shirtcliffe.] You advocate a flat rate: of land-tax and income:-tax ? —Yes. Mr. Clark will say, and it is absolutely true, that he has a pretty hard row to hoe to get that income. But why not adopt the English method ? The farmer is assessed arbitrarily with an income. Generally, it is the renting-value. Mr. Clark.] You have the same objection there as you have to a land-tax, that the farmer weiukl pay whether he was making a profit or not. That is the trouble about that ? —Excuse me ; you are: not quite right. I went into a farm. The rent was £400. It went up in war-time to substantially more. Then I always had the opportunity of showing that I had not made the £400. Mr. Clark.] Yes, there is that?- That is the suggestion I have to make. You will require in the different districts, if you are going to have that arbitrary method, some local adviser-. Mr. Clark : Yes ; but that would mean that if the farmer made a less profit than the arbitrary assessment he would get a concession ; whip if he made more the State: woulel not get the balance. Witness : That is ray proposition. Mr. Clark : I do not think that is a fair one. Witness : It all depends on what you put your arbitrary assessment at. Mr. Clark: You must put it at an average rate. You cannot put it too high, anel you cannot put it too low. Witness : But is not the average: rate the fail' rate over a series of years ? Mr. Clark : You are: taking it on the rental value ? Witness: It is just the same if you put it on an 8-per-cent. basis or a 6-per-cent. basis, is it not ? Mr. Clark: Yes. Witness: lam not attempting to argue. lam emly giving you my experience in England. That is what we paid ; and, as a matter of fact, that rent was arranged on that farm. I toeik it over for the last four years of a twenty-years' lease, so it was away back. Mr. Clark : Taking it at the rental value ? Witness : And they doubled the: assessment during the, war. I went in when the tax was on £450, and when I went out it was on nearly £1,200. Mr. Clark.] But you propose that the farmer should be: allowed the opportunity of showing his actual profit over a number of years. Why not let him show his actual profit for one year ? If he can do it over a, number of years, why not for one ? —Because he; is what he is. It is a matter of education, is it not ? —That is quite right, and ho should keep accounts. It would be to his benefit ultimately to have: accounts ; but 1 can only anticipate your difficulty in this matter. If he has an immediate reward for keeping his accounts accurately and fairly, such as getting a reduction on this arbitrary assessment, probably he will do it; and when one farmer does it —well, farmers are like a flock of sheep. If the farmers know that Jones has got his incometax down by keeping these accounts, they will dei it, They know that now, Mr. Hall ?—I do not think so, on the whole. Quite a number of the farmers of North Canterbury have employed accountants ? —Would you like to guess at the average, taking our two thousand wheat-growers here or seven thousand farmers, in North Canterbury ? Mr. Clark : No, I would not. Witness : I do not suppose there arc a hundred. Mr. Clark : The thing is growing. Witness : I hope it is. Mr. Clark : If you remember, we had the same difficulty when we, first started assessing incometax on business. We we're told distinctly and emphatically that we could not ascertain the. income of a business in any year. There: was a strong objection raised to the income-tax, when it was instituted, on that ground. Witness: That is all right, it is all the, more in favour of my argument. If you can do it, elo it. When a business man does not do things ho appears before His Honour and he goes to gaol. Mr. Clark.] A farmer is liable tei the' same penalty, is he not ?—I have never heard of its being enforced yet. However, that is the' suggestion with regard to the land-tax. It is usual in England to have, local assessors. In the Old Country the, lands are divided into parishes. When the income is assessed by the Revenue Department it is all referred to the parish, and the assessment would go before the church-warden, who is supposed to say whether it is a fair thing. Mr. Clark: But we have our local Inspectors. Witness : But what is the district ? What is the unit of area ? Mr. Clark : The provincial district. Witness: It is too big. What do 1 know about the man clown on the Waitaki.