HC Deb 10 May 1894 vol 24 cc796-7
MR. KNOX

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the provision in the Finance Bill raising the Death Duties on estates between £150 and £300 from a fixed sum of 30s. to an ad valorem duty of 1 per cent. will press very hardly on small farmers in Ireland whose farms are valued for probate at or under £300; and whether he will consider the advisability of so modifying the Bill as not to increase the burden on a class already severely weighted with rates, as well as indirect taxation?

SIR W. HARCOURT

I am not aware that the change in question will press hardly on small farmers in Ireland, nor can I conceive that it will press-hardly on anyone. The hon. Member must not forget that it is only when an. estate is under £300 gross that the 30s-payment at present applies. If a farmer has property of £350 and £100 of debts, he pays £5 on the present system, whereas in future he will pay only £3.

MR. WEIR (Ross and Cromarty)

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that serious loss will be sustained by persons who have purchased reversionary interests prior to the proposed Finance Bill; and whether, in such cases, the application of the Bill will be made non-retrospective?

SIR W. HARCOURT

Persons who have purchased reversionary interests prior to the passing of the Finance Bill will not be affected at all if the reversionary interests are in property which has already paid Probate and Account Duty (see Section 17) (1). Purchasers of other reversionary interests will not be more affected than they were by the Succession Duty Act, which imposed rates varying from 1 to 10 per cent., or by the present Estate Duty, or by the additional Succession Duties of 1888.

* MR. GIBSON BOWLES

Will not the Estate Duty on these reversions vary according to the aggregate of the estate whereof they form part?

SIR W. HARCOURT

Yes, Sir.

COLONEL HOWARD VINCENT (Sheffield, Central)

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it is intended by the Finance Bill to allow owners of cottage property who, although not occupiers, are directly assessed to the Income Tax (Schedule A) under General Rule IV., Section 60, of the Income Tax of 1842, the benefit of the one-sixth abatement; and in such case, if he will cause such amendment to be inserted in Section 33 as shall make it quite clear that this is the case, and that the benefit is not to be limited to cases where the tax is charged or paid by the occupier?

SIR W. HARCOURT

The intention is as indicated in the first part of the question, and, if necessary, I will insert such words in Clause 31 as will make the intention perfectly clear.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the practical results of carrying into effect Clause 8 of the Finance Bill; and whether, having regard to its results as they would affect the trade and industries of the country, he will abandon that clause?

SIR W. HARCOURT

I am not prepared to abandon Clause 8, but I will consider any alteration or modification of it that may be shown to be necessary. There are some alterations which I think will have to be made.