Mr. NEWDEGATEasked whether the rebate on Income Tax on £160, formerly allowed to British subjects living abroad and possessing an income of under £700 per annum, is no longer granted unless they have a domicile or permanent home in the British Isles; and whether this allowance is, notwithstanding, granted to foreigners possessing a similar income from investments in British securities?
§ Mr. ILLINGWORTHNo person, whether a British subject or not (unless falling within the classes enumerated in the proviso to Section 71 (1) of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, as amended by Section 12 of the Revenue Act, 1911), is entitled to claim abatement of Income Tax by reason of his total income not exceeding £700 per annum, unless he is resident in the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. LANE-FOXasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether cheques in payment of Income Tax, and drawn in February, have not been cashed till after 31st March; and, if so, why this course was pursued?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI am not aware of any such case as the hon. Member refers to. If he will furnish me with particulars of any specific case, I will cause inquiry to be made.
§ Mr. GEORGE TERRELLasked the amount of arrears remaining unpaid in respect of Income Tax at the end of each of the financial years 1902–3, 1903–4, 1904–5, 1905–6, 1906–7, 1907–8, 1908–9, 1909–10, and 1910–11?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe figures for which the hon. Member asks are as follows:—1902–3, £6,116,000; 1903–4, £3,860,000; 1904–5, £3,520,000; 1905–6, £3,764,000; 1906–7, £3,927,000; 1907–8, £4,224,000. As regards the years 1908–9 and 1909–10 the figures which are partly estimated are 1908–9, £3,900,000; 1909–10, £27,825,000.With regard to 1910–11 the 1986 position was explained in my Budget statement yesterday.
§ Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked in how many cases repayment of excess of Income Tax under Schedule A has been made under Section 69 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910; what is the aggregate amount of Treasury disbursements under this head; and what is the amount now standing to the credit of the fund for this purpose constituted by the annual appropriation of £500,000?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI hope shortly to be able to state the figures which the hon. Member desires?
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the Chancellor whether, under Section 69 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, it is necessary for the purposes of administration to divide agricultural hereditaments into land and farmhouses on the one hand and labourers' cottages on the other, with the result that although an actual maintenance expenditure upon the tenanted part of an estate may in the aggregate far exceed 25 per cent. of the income, such rebate cannot be obtained from the Exchequer if the expenditure under one of the above heads falls below this amount; and whether, in view of the clearly expressed intention of this provision when the Bill was under discussion, he will modify either the administration or Sub-section (3) of the Act accordingly?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEIn administering the provisions of Section 69 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, it is not the practice to insist on the lands (including farmhouses) being dealt with separately from the cottages.
§ Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that Sub-section (3) of this Section has been legally interpreted to mean that cottages on one hand and farmhouses and land on the other are to be separated with the result that in most cases 25 per cent. is not obtainable, although more than this proportion has been spent?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe hon. Gentleman's information on these subjects is so accurate that I am not prepared to traverse it. As he knows very well, I am exceedingly anxious, in the case of cottages, that every allowance should be made for repairs. The landlord should be encouraged to spend money on the repairs of cottages.