Mr. BOIVIN:

I merely bring this to the attention of the committee to show that the sales tax which is imposed to-day, large as it is, and liable to be pyramided as it is-

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Hear, hear.

Mr. BOIVIN:

I am willing to admit that the sales tax is liable to be pyramided to a certain extent; I do not think anyone on this side of the House ever said it could not and would not be pyramided under certain circumstances, but I say it is not nearly so bad to have one straight sales tax which the consumer knows he is obliged to pay and which is based upon the manufacturer's price of the goods. It is a hundred times better to have this tax than to have a sales tax of one and one-half per cent on every transaction, which was almost tantamount to a turnover tax. There are a great many things to be said in favour of a turnover tax, but if such a tax is to be imposed it should fee a very small tax and should be imposed on all transactions. That is not what hon. gentlemen opposite did when they imposed their sales

Special War Revenue Act

tax which they said was only one and one-half per cent, but which in many eases worked up as high as seven and eight per cent.

I do not want to go into a discussion of the income tax at present, because I know I would be very properly called to order by the Chairman. To-morrow, I hope, the income tax resolutions will be before parliament, and it may then be my privilege to show the people of Canada that the old tax as it was imposed, .was a very unfair tax, by which a great many people did not pay what they should pay, while others paid a great deal more than their fair proportion. But I will say that in connection with the income tax there are at least 35 per cent of the people of Canada who paid income taxes last year who will pay no income taxes this year, and for those people there is certainly a real reduction. I will say also that for those who are between $10,000 and $50,000 a year, it is only in the case where 50 per cent or more of those revenues are derived from the dividends of joint stock companies that there is any increase. When the figure of $50,000 is passed there is a decrease all along the line, but there is not the same proportionate decrease for the big incomes as for the smaller incomes. I am sure that if my hon. friends compare the figures they will admit that statement; they will see that this is really a poor man's budget, and that when this budget was introduced it brought a reduction in income tax to the man with the small income. The hon. member for Fort William smiles again; I know he is going to interject another remark, but before he does so let me tell him that of the $12,000,000 reduction in income tax over $6,000,000 is removed from the people with incomes of less than $6,000 a year. If that is not a poor man's budget I would like my hon. friend to tell me what is.

Mr. MANION:

What about, the 90 per

cent of the people who never pay income tax at all?

Mr. BOIVIN:

If my hon. friend wishes

us to pay a bonus to those who never pay taxes, that may be good Conservative legislation, but I have yet to learn how we can reduce taxation to those who do not pay taxes.

Hear, hear.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

It is always wise to

do the applauding before the truth is revealed. 1 would suggest to the minister that if he really wants to relieve the poor-those

for whom his heart as well as others bled some years ago; those who never get within striking distance of ability to pay income tax-4he thing to do would be to reduce the sales tax. How is it that the government stand to-day with that tax 66| per cent higher, while they reduced these other taxes and boast of having a poor man's budget?

Mr. BOIVIN:

My right hon. friend is very familiar with the law; he knows it very much better than I know it, and he helped frame it. If he will take the Special War Revenue Act of 1915 as amended to date, even without the amendments of this year; if he will read sub-paragraph 4 of section 19 BBB he will find that everything required by a poor man, everything going into a poor man's budget and almost everything really a necessity of life, does not pay any sales tax at all.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

The hon. gentleman,

then, is the author of the theory that clothing is not necessary to a poor man, but an automobile is?

Mr. BOIVIN:

The automobile pays sales

tax.

The CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Robb moves that section 6 be amended by adding thereto the following:

Apples, dried, dessicated or evaporated; goods enumerated in customs tariff item 105a.

Section as amended agreed to.

On section 7:

Mr. MEIGHEN:

What does this do? Is carbonic acid gas a necessity of life, or what?

Mr. ROBB:

This is removing taxation; it

will be a loss in revenue of $28,000 a year.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

What does this affect?

Mr. ROBB:

Soda water.