HC Deb 05 May 1904 vol 134 cc527-8

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if it is the practice of the Board of Inland Revenue, in valuing licensed houses for the purposes of the Estate Duty, to assume that the licence will continue to be renewed for an indefinite or for what number of years; and whether it is practicable to lay a Statement of the practice of the Board, in dealing with the various interests connected with the sale of intoxicating liquors similar to Parliamentary Paper, No. 176, of Session 1890.

with the amounts which the additions to taxation are estimated to yield per annum:—

of 1904–5 from the Customs and Excise Duties shows an increase in the period compared of a little over £12,800,000; but the yield of the additions to taxation is computed at £16,700,000. The difference is partly due to the fact that the receipts in 1899–1900 were unduly swollen by the special clearances effected in anticipation of increases of duty on account of the war. Another cause of the difference is the falling off of the receipts from some of the consumable articles subjected to duty.

(Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The general rule in valuing licenced houses for the purpose of Estate Duty is (as was the case prior to 1894, and as was shown in Parliamentary Paper, No. 176, of 1890) to assume that the licence will be renewed continuously. But any special circumstances affecting the probability of continuous renewal in a particular case would be taken into consideration. The "Short Statement' presented on Tuesday, read in conjunction with Paper No. 176 of 1890, appears to give as much information as can be afforded in regard to the practice of the Department.