2 JUNE 1933, Page 15

[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] Sm,—I should be sorry

to occupy your space with mere pertinacity ; for the principle you state "that reserves put aside as basis for future trading should be taxed whether in the case of private concerns or oo-operative societies" would be just if reserves were taxable as reserves, as buildings are rated as buildings.

But as the Treasury representatives on the Royal Com- mission on Income Tax made clear, the undistributed reserves of companies are not taxed as reserves. They arc taxed solely as income to individuals, taxable when divided, and therefore taxable undivided. The fact that under the same law the co-operative surpluses are untaxable when dis- tributed by the six million consumer-members (as sole owners) to themselves, indicates their quite different character.

What co-operators feel is that in classing funds of different nature as if they were the same, the Government is distorting facts to force a special conclusion ; since co-operative corporate savings that would be properly liable under a general savings tax are not justly to be assessed under any form of Income Tax.

—I am, Sir, &e., I'. Rlinnum. Bankside, Mellor Road, Marple Bridge.