§ MR. HUDSON KEARLEY (Devonport)I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the object of Income Tax Form No. 8, list of all persons employed, to be delivered by persons employing others (whether paid by weekly wages or otherwise), under penalties, and what is the meaning of the note stating that the penalty is not incurred by omitting to include in the list the names of persons whoso total incomes respectively do not exceed £160 a year; and whether employers are expected to question all servants and workmen not returned for as to their private means; if not, whether he will cause the wording of the instructions to be altered, so as to make it clear that the responsibility of the employer in respect of this list is limited to making a true return of I salaries over £160 paid by himself to his servants?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir MICHAEL HICKS BEACH,) Bristol, W.The form to which the hon. Member refers is issued under the authority of Section 50 of the Act 5 and 6 Vict., cap. 35, and the note is inserted because of the proviso to that section, which enacts that no one who is required to deliver such a list shall be liable to penalties for the omission of the name of any person in his employ, if it shall appear to the Commissioners for executing the Act that such person is entitled to total exemption from income-tax. I am unable to agree with the hon. Member that the responsibility of the employer is limited as he suggests. It seems to me that the law requires that, if the employer wishes to omit from the list the name of any person in his employ, he should use reasonable means to satisfy himself that the person is entitled to exemption.