DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68026#0085
ROYAL COMMISSION UPON DECENTRALIZATION.
79
’Kyaukse.
Mandalay.
Sagaing.
Shwebo.
Minbu.
Meiktila.
Yamethin.
Magwe.
Myingyan
and Upper
Chindwin,
partially.
Katha.
Burma. In these instructions provision was made for
the first time for the assessment of a land tax on all
lands, and definite rules relating to the adjustment of
thathameda were framed ; and it was explained that
the directions had been drafted in the hope that they
would enable “ Settlement Officers to prepare proposals
for a system of taxation which will be far more
equitable than the present system of thathameda and
rent.” After much discussion the directions were
approved by the Government of India, and in 1894
they were issued under the title of Directions to
Settlement Officers in Upper Burma.
The main principles laid down in these directions
so far as the restriction of the thathameda tax is
concerned may be summarised as follows :—
(1) All private land was to be brought under
assessment.
(2) In fixing his rates the Settlement Officer was
to consider, among other things, the amount
previously paid by the holders on private
land in the form of thathameda, and on
State land in the form of thathameda plus
rent.
(3) All holders of land, whether private or State,
who were assessed to revenue on account of it,
were exempt from thathameda if they lived
solely on the produce or income derived from
that land.
(4) If, however, they derived half or more of
their total income from sources independent
of the land, they were to pay thathameda
in respect of those other sources at rates not
exceeding half the average rates which non-
agriculturists would pay on account of such
sources.
(5) All who held no land, and therefore paid no
land revenue to the State, were to pay that-
hameda at full rates.
(6) The existing system of assessing the total
thathameda demand at a fixed all-round rate
per household was to be abolished. In its
place the Settlement Officer was to classify
the households by occupation, and to propose
a separate rate per household for each class,
based upon the actual assessments of the past
five years.
The reasons which led the Government of Burma
to introduce a land revenue assessment into Upper
Burma in partial supersession of the thathameda tax
have now been explained, and it seems unnecessary to
trace the subsequent history of the question. It may
be noted, however, that the directions of 1894 proved
unworkable, mainly for the reasons (1) that there were
very few pure agriculturists, (2) that the amount of
the subsidiary income of agricultural classes varies
greatly from year to year, and (3) that the income of
the non-landed classes having the same occupations
varied from village to village and from year to year.
In 1896 the Chief Commissioner went so far as to
propose gradually to abolish thathameda altogether.
He wrote as follows :—
“ Up to the present time the districts noted on the
margin have been cadastrally surveyed, and we must, if
we wish to utilize the survey, gradually abolish that-
hameda and assess private lands, as indeed Sir Frederic
Fryer always intended to do. The Chief Commis-
sioner proposes to abolish thathameda at once in
Mandalay and Kyaukse, where rates are ready for
assessment on private lands, and as soon as the settle-
ments are completed in Sagaing, Minbu, and Meiktila.
In Shwebo, Magwe, Myingyan, Pakokku (not yet
surveyed), and Yamethin the Chief Commissioner
considers it will be better to allow the present system
to continue until the settlement operations in Sagaing,
Minbu, and Meiktila have been concluded and their
results carefully considered. In such districts as the
Ruby Mines, Bhamo, Katha, Upper Chindwin, and
Myitkyina it will be better to retain the thathameda
till things are more settled and cultivation has in-
creased, as the Chief Commissioner considers that the
thathameda will bring in more revenue than any other
system of taxation. Sir Frederic Fryer does not agree
with the opinion that the thathameda is a harsh or
oppressive tax ; but thinks, on the contrary, that the
thamadis assess it, on the whole, very fairly. It is,
however, a non-expansive form of taxation and leads
to endless disputes as to what are State and what are
private lands, in which public feeling is always against .Vr. R. 11'.
the Government. Private lands keep growing and Carlyle.
raise many awkward questions which will only be
settled when they are assessed.” * Apr-. 1908.
The Government of India were, however, doubtful
whether the time was ripe for any decisive action
which would bind them irrevocably for the future to a
change so far-reaching as that proposed. They reviewed
the history of the question and summed up their con-
clusions as follows :—
“(a) No tax of the nature of thathameda can ever
be an effective means of securing to Govern-
ment that share of the produce of land which
it may claim as its due. An assessment of
land revenue is based upon cultivated area,
which is a measurable fact, capable of exact
ascertainment. The assessment of thathameda
is based upon an estimate of income, which
must be mainly a matter of opinion. . The
former expands automatically with the exten-
sion of cultivation, and secures to Government
its proper share of what is the principal form
of wealth in this country ; while, under a
suitable system, such as obtains in Upper
Burma, it fluctuates also with the variation of
the seasons, and so adjusts the burden to the
means of bearing it. The latter depends
wholly upon population, which does not
necessarily vary with the cultivated area;
while the total demand, at any rate, does not
change with the nature of the season, so that
it must be so low that it can be paid in a bad
year.
“(6) Thathameda, as at present levied, is exceed-
ingly unequal in its incidence upon one town
or village as compared with another ; and
this, because it is levied at one uniform rate
per household throughout a district, so that
a poor family living in a village which includes
many rich families will pay only a small
fraction of what it would have to pay if they
were absent.
“(c) On the other hand, the distribution of the
thathameda as among the component families
of each individual village is exceedingly
equitable, far more so than any assessment
would be which Government itself could
frame ; and infinitely more so than an all-
round capitation tax.
“ (d) Considered from this last point of view, its
main defect is that there is a tendency to tax
unskilled labour too highly. Probably it is
open to the same criticism to which all
Government assessments are open ; that the
assessing officer is afraid to go high enough on
the rich, or low enough on the poor, whether
persons or lands.”
Finally, as the result of protracted discussion lasting
for over five years, it was decided in connection with
the Minbu settlement to abandon any attempt to
adjust thathameda in the manner prescribed in the
directions of 1894 and to retain the old system (which
had in practice never been abolished) of assessing the
total revised demand at a fixed all-round rate for
households, modifying it however by reducing the
general rate of Rs. 10 per household to a rate con-
siderably lower, and varying according to the circum-
stances of each district, and by distributing the total
revised demand at varying rates among the different
tracts of the district according to their circumstances.
In all the Upper Burma settlements which have been
sanctioned in the last six years these principles have
been followed, and they have now been embodied in the
Instructions for Original Settlements in Upper Burma
published in 1907. The policy of the Burma Govern-
ment in respect of thathameda is now (a) to throw on
the land in the form of land revenue or rent practi-
cally the whole of the taxation imposed on agricultural
profits ; (6) to retain the existing total taxation upon
non-agricultural incomes unaltered, but to re-adjust its
distribution so as to relieve the poorer and especially
the labouring classes. And the principles on which
this policy is worked may be summarised briefly as
follows:—
(a) that the thathameda assessment has hitherto
been made on agricultural and non-agricul-
tural income indiscriminately;
79
’Kyaukse.
Mandalay.
Sagaing.
Shwebo.
Minbu.
Meiktila.
Yamethin.
Magwe.
Myingyan
and Upper
Chindwin,
partially.
Katha.
Burma. In these instructions provision was made for
the first time for the assessment of a land tax on all
lands, and definite rules relating to the adjustment of
thathameda were framed ; and it was explained that
the directions had been drafted in the hope that they
would enable “ Settlement Officers to prepare proposals
for a system of taxation which will be far more
equitable than the present system of thathameda and
rent.” After much discussion the directions were
approved by the Government of India, and in 1894
they were issued under the title of Directions to
Settlement Officers in Upper Burma.
The main principles laid down in these directions
so far as the restriction of the thathameda tax is
concerned may be summarised as follows :—
(1) All private land was to be brought under
assessment.
(2) In fixing his rates the Settlement Officer was
to consider, among other things, the amount
previously paid by the holders on private
land in the form of thathameda, and on
State land in the form of thathameda plus
rent.
(3) All holders of land, whether private or State,
who were assessed to revenue on account of it,
were exempt from thathameda if they lived
solely on the produce or income derived from
that land.
(4) If, however, they derived half or more of
their total income from sources independent
of the land, they were to pay thathameda
in respect of those other sources at rates not
exceeding half the average rates which non-
agriculturists would pay on account of such
sources.
(5) All who held no land, and therefore paid no
land revenue to the State, were to pay that-
hameda at full rates.
(6) The existing system of assessing the total
thathameda demand at a fixed all-round rate
per household was to be abolished. In its
place the Settlement Officer was to classify
the households by occupation, and to propose
a separate rate per household for each class,
based upon the actual assessments of the past
five years.
The reasons which led the Government of Burma
to introduce a land revenue assessment into Upper
Burma in partial supersession of the thathameda tax
have now been explained, and it seems unnecessary to
trace the subsequent history of the question. It may
be noted, however, that the directions of 1894 proved
unworkable, mainly for the reasons (1) that there were
very few pure agriculturists, (2) that the amount of
the subsidiary income of agricultural classes varies
greatly from year to year, and (3) that the income of
the non-landed classes having the same occupations
varied from village to village and from year to year.
In 1896 the Chief Commissioner went so far as to
propose gradually to abolish thathameda altogether.
He wrote as follows :—
“ Up to the present time the districts noted on the
margin have been cadastrally surveyed, and we must, if
we wish to utilize the survey, gradually abolish that-
hameda and assess private lands, as indeed Sir Frederic
Fryer always intended to do. The Chief Commis-
sioner proposes to abolish thathameda at once in
Mandalay and Kyaukse, where rates are ready for
assessment on private lands, and as soon as the settle-
ments are completed in Sagaing, Minbu, and Meiktila.
In Shwebo, Magwe, Myingyan, Pakokku (not yet
surveyed), and Yamethin the Chief Commissioner
considers it will be better to allow the present system
to continue until the settlement operations in Sagaing,
Minbu, and Meiktila have been concluded and their
results carefully considered. In such districts as the
Ruby Mines, Bhamo, Katha, Upper Chindwin, and
Myitkyina it will be better to retain the thathameda
till things are more settled and cultivation has in-
creased, as the Chief Commissioner considers that the
thathameda will bring in more revenue than any other
system of taxation. Sir Frederic Fryer does not agree
with the opinion that the thathameda is a harsh or
oppressive tax ; but thinks, on the contrary, that the
thamadis assess it, on the whole, very fairly. It is,
however, a non-expansive form of taxation and leads
to endless disputes as to what are State and what are
private lands, in which public feeling is always against .Vr. R. 11'.
the Government. Private lands keep growing and Carlyle.
raise many awkward questions which will only be
settled when they are assessed.” * Apr-. 1908.
The Government of India were, however, doubtful
whether the time was ripe for any decisive action
which would bind them irrevocably for the future to a
change so far-reaching as that proposed. They reviewed
the history of the question and summed up their con-
clusions as follows :—
“(a) No tax of the nature of thathameda can ever
be an effective means of securing to Govern-
ment that share of the produce of land which
it may claim as its due. An assessment of
land revenue is based upon cultivated area,
which is a measurable fact, capable of exact
ascertainment. The assessment of thathameda
is based upon an estimate of income, which
must be mainly a matter of opinion. . The
former expands automatically with the exten-
sion of cultivation, and secures to Government
its proper share of what is the principal form
of wealth in this country ; while, under a
suitable system, such as obtains in Upper
Burma, it fluctuates also with the variation of
the seasons, and so adjusts the burden to the
means of bearing it. The latter depends
wholly upon population, which does not
necessarily vary with the cultivated area;
while the total demand, at any rate, does not
change with the nature of the season, so that
it must be so low that it can be paid in a bad
year.
“(6) Thathameda, as at present levied, is exceed-
ingly unequal in its incidence upon one town
or village as compared with another ; and
this, because it is levied at one uniform rate
per household throughout a district, so that
a poor family living in a village which includes
many rich families will pay only a small
fraction of what it would have to pay if they
were absent.
“(c) On the other hand, the distribution of the
thathameda as among the component families
of each individual village is exceedingly
equitable, far more so than any assessment
would be which Government itself could
frame ; and infinitely more so than an all-
round capitation tax.
“ (d) Considered from this last point of view, its
main defect is that there is a tendency to tax
unskilled labour too highly. Probably it is
open to the same criticism to which all
Government assessments are open ; that the
assessing officer is afraid to go high enough on
the rich, or low enough on the poor, whether
persons or lands.”
Finally, as the result of protracted discussion lasting
for over five years, it was decided in connection with
the Minbu settlement to abandon any attempt to
adjust thathameda in the manner prescribed in the
directions of 1894 and to retain the old system (which
had in practice never been abolished) of assessing the
total revised demand at a fixed all-round rate for
households, modifying it however by reducing the
general rate of Rs. 10 per household to a rate con-
siderably lower, and varying according to the circum-
stances of each district, and by distributing the total
revised demand at varying rates among the different
tracts of the district according to their circumstances.
In all the Upper Burma settlements which have been
sanctioned in the last six years these principles have
been followed, and they have now been embodied in the
Instructions for Original Settlements in Upper Burma
published in 1907. The policy of the Burma Govern-
ment in respect of thathameda is now (a) to throw on
the land in the form of land revenue or rent practi-
cally the whole of the taxation imposed on agricultural
profits ; (6) to retain the existing total taxation upon
non-agricultural incomes unaltered, but to re-adjust its
distribution so as to relieve the poorer and especially
the labouring classes. And the principles on which
this policy is worked may be summarised briefly as
follows:—
(a) that the thathameda assessment has hitherto
been made on agricultural and non-agricul-
tural income indiscriminately;