§ MR. TOTTENHAMasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he will state the principle on which Staff Officers living in the wooden huts of the camps of instruction at Aldershot, and elsewhere, are called upon to pay taxes for the quarters occupied by them, while Regimental Officers living in the next huts are exempt from such liability; whether the occupation by Staff Officers of quarters in camp is in most cases compulsory; and, whether they are not, equally with Regimental Officers, liable to frequent and instant removal; and if, in such cases of removal, any refund is made of the amount paid them in advance?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OFTHE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)Sir, I have to say that a Staff officer holding a permanent appointment, or an appointment in the nature of a permanency, and occupying official quarters for a fixed number of years, is liable under the express provisions of the Income Tax Act to pay duty under Schedule A. He would be further liable to pay Inhabited House Duty if he had the exclusive use of a house not being a "hut" or quarters in barracks. A regimental officer, on the other hand, who is liable to frequent removal, is not in practice considered to be chargeable either to Schedule A or to Inhabited House Duty, whether he resides in a house, "hut," or quarters in barracks. In cases where Staff officers are removed, their liability is limited to the actual period of their occupation, and, on proof of any over-charge, an adjustment will always be made.