Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):
pseudo-remedy is that suggested by section 31 of the resolution to amend the Income War Tax Act, which provides that one-half of expenditures on maintenance and repairs incurred by any taxpayer, in a period to be at the whim of the government, be regarded as deferred maintenance and repairs and to be deductible as an expense at the option of the taxpayer in certain periods. For that concession, many thanks. But it is too little. We all know what deferred maintenance is, and there is a tremendous lot of it piling up to-day because of high taxation. Ask any industrialist and he will tell you. Obsolescent and worn-out machinery that cannot be replaced-every industrial company to-day has an immense quantity of deferred maintenance, and the need of repairs is great, taxation being what it is. But I ask the minister, why an arbitrary one-half? If it is a good thing and they need the money, why not give full allowance for deferred maintenance? If the principle is good, then it should be applied according to the needs of the industrial establishment itself. Some people may want seventy-five per cent; others may want twenty-five per cent.
Subtopic: THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic: DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE