HC Deb 12 July 1910 vol 19 cc195-7
Mr. WATT

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that his department in Scotland are insisting on payment of Income Tax at the higher or unearned rate from shipmasters and engineers who are absent from the United Kingdom for nine to eighteen months, and even longer, and are, therefore, unable to make their claims under the Act; and, if so, whether he will instruct that in the cases of proved absence from the country in the pursuit of their trade these taxpayers will be given some consideration?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I am not aware that the action indicated by my hon. Friend in the first part of his question is being pursued. If, however, he will be so good as to furnish me with particulars of such a case, I will cause inquiry to be made. I should add that a special notice is issued to master mariners, ships' engineers, etc., informing them that in case of seafaring persons whose absences extend to six months, and who are not actually in the United Kingdom between 6th April and 30th September, claims will be accepted after 30th September, provided that they are preferred within one month after the taxpayer's next return to this country.

Mr. GIBSON BOWLES

Does not the difficulty in reality arise from one of the provisions of the Income Tax Act itself, and will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether some amendment might not be made to enable people to claim abatements some time after the return of their income, it, being physically impossible for them to measure them before.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

It is dear you must have some fixed date, or otherwise it would be impossible to levy the Income Tax at all, and that it must be some date which will enable the Commissioners to proceed with the collection some time before the end of the financial year. That is the difficulty. I do not think that there is any inherent difficulty in the Act at all, but it follows from the necessities of the financial year.

Mr. GIBSON BOWLES

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered whether 31st December could not he substituted for 30th September. That would allow ample time for the collection and give the taxpayer an opportunity of making the claim.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I am very much afraid that whatever date you fix you will have a certain number of persons who will not put in their claims, and I think it really arises from the fact that so many people are careless in that respect and not from the fact that 30th September is more inconvenient than 31st December.

Mr. WATT

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when specific cases are put before him the individuals whose cases are put before him are likely to suffer disadvantage in future from the action of his Department?

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member had better put the question on the Paper.