HIGHER TAXATION MOST UNDESIRABLE.
Page 10
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Why a Low Basis of Taxation Must be Retained in the Case of Goods and Passenger-carrying Vehicles.
By C. Le N. Gosselin.
CONSIDERABLE prominence has recently been. given in a certain section of the Press to sugges
tions that motor taxation should be strictly in accordance with " user of the road," the purpose underlying such propaganda being to reduce the tax on privately owned motorcars at the expense of users of commercial vehicles.
Many private or light car owners have pleaded that, as they are only occasienal users of the road, it is unfair that they should be taxed on the same basis as others who are regular users thereof.
Great stress has been laid upon the increasing expenditure upon our highways, but sight has been lost pf the fact that a large proportion of such expendi ture has been incurred, not only in strengthening our roads to withstand the heaviest forms of traffic, but also in widening and straightening them to accommodate and facilitate the passage of the large volume of high-speed traffic which is practically entirely composed of the lighter forms of motorcars, and largely consists of seasonal or week-end traffic. • If these improvements in the facilities for the use of mechanical road transport are provided by the State, it is not reasonable for owners of cars to coreplaie that, because they do not cere to make full use of them, they should not contribute their quota.
The Stateprovides other facilities for the common user, such as police pratection; education, asylums, sanitoria, etc., to the maintenance of which the same motorists are called .upon to contribite, but not in proportion to the user of the same, although, indirectly, the community, as• a whole, benefits from their existence.
Much of the work now being undertaken on our roads is of a capital nature and will not require to be repeated, and it is unwise that the cost should be borne entirely by the community at a time when it is suffering so severely from the effects of the greatest war the world has ever experienced.
The question of public advantage must condition all matters of taxation, as has been fully recognized in past litigation. The postal and telegraph services offer special terms to trade and commerce, the railway companies to commercial travellers, and Parliament has always made a similar distinction in the past between vehicles which are placed on the road for public use and those which are merely employed by private individuals for their personal convenience. In. these days, it is more than ever incumbent upon Parliament to give consideration to any possibility of oSsisting a revival in trade and industry, and it is Clear that the first and most obvious step to be taken is to relieve the oppressive taxation which the trade
of this country is endeavouring to support. The proposal to increase the taxation on the commercial motor for the relief of the privately owned car hardly seems to be a step in this direction.
The ability of our public road services to pay higher taxation is certainly queationable. The carriage of goods by road is definitely, although, no doubt, temporarily, on the decline, and is, generally speaking,unprofitable to those engaged in, the industry.
e development Of public passenger services is one ,pf urgent national importance. Owing to the higher
standard of living now obtained by the large majority of our workers, more houses are required per thousand head of population than ever before. There is,
in fact, a shortage of houses as compared with prewar days. A vast scheme for building houses is in contemplation. It can only be achieved by spreading our town and city populations over large areas out B28 side our existing towns. The possibility of doing so must depend upon a vast development of bus services to carry the workers to and from their work at moderate charges. Every encouragement must be given to the development of such bus services, and that end will not be obtained by taxing them in proportion to their mileage.
This extension of the. populace over wider areas also calls for larger radii of delivery for goods and foodstuffs, which can only be met by the application and employment of motor goods services. Such matters as these are surely worthy of coneideration in apportioning the taxation of the motorists as a whole. The price a private motorist May care to expend upon his method of conveyance is purely a personal matter, but the cost of transporting raw materials, food, and workers to and from their work is eventually decided by the price this country can obtain for its goods in the markets of the world.
The question of ability to pay is, therefore, a very real and important factor, and has not, in the opinion of the writer, received the attention which it deserves.
Better Transport Facilitates Commerce.
There can be no question but that the rapid development of any new form of transport opens up vistas of greater prosperity to mankind.
It is to the interests of all countries to foster such development, and for those not directly engaged in the development to give liberal financial support. Any policy, therefore, which suggests that motorists should pay for the full costs of the roads is to be deprecated. The question of ability to pay and collateral national advantages obtained through the service are matters which must condition the question of taxation.
There is an unfortunate inclination abroad to give preference to matters of pleasure rather than of work.
Taxes on recreations are decried, but the burden is made heavier for trade and commerce. The entertain ment tax is reduced and the McKenna duties are abolished in the hope of reducing the price of motorcars, in both eases involving a loss of revenue to the country which would have been better employed in a reduction of postal charges or in some other direction which would have brought relief to our overtaxed industries.
It is now suggested that commercial motor vehicles engaged in trade and industry should be taxed, with
out any regard to the merits of their service tothe community, but merely according to the measure of the use they make of the roads.
The method of taxation suggested has been a " fuel tax." Whilst it is clear that a heavy slow-moving
vehicle must consume more fuel per mile than a light motorcar or cycle, it certainly may bear 'no relation to
actual user of the road, as is exemplified in the differencesin consumption obtained from the same vehicle running ine towe and running in the country. The existing system of taxation, although capable of much improvement and sadly lacking in elasticity, has much to commend it, and in adopting it Parlia
ment has wisely decided not to endeavour to apportion I the exact amount due from the individual
motorist on account of the use he may or may not make of the facilities provided for hurt. At the same time Parliament has insisted upon continuing to
recognize the advantage to the community of public transport services, as compared with the service which is privately owned and caters only for the convenience of the individual who runs it.