HC Deb 14 November 1911 vol 31 cc188-92
Mr. LANE-FOX

asked, in view of the fact that of the 36,000 copies of Form IV. issued in Ireland more than half have not been even partially filled up, he will say what steps have been taken to enforce the penalty of £50 for non-compliance with such demands for information within thirty days, laid down in the Finance Act, 1910?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

No case has yet arisen in which it has been considered necessary to take steps to enforce the penalty referred to.

Mr. LANE-FOX

In view of the fact that of the 36,000 forms sent out 15,000 have not been returned and 19,000 have only been partially filled up, does the right hon. Gentleman state that the Government have taken no steps whatever to enforce the penalty?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

They have not taken the steps suggested in the hon. Member's question.

Sir HILDRED CARLILE

Was the usual 2d. per form paid to the officials in Ireland?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

The hon. Member must give me notice of that question.

Mr. G. D. FABER

What steps have been taken?

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member must give notice.

Mr. PRETYMAN

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman can state what progress has been made in reducing the 18,000 cases where executors' accounts cannot be cleared pending the reference of the valuations for Estate Duty to the Land Valuation Department?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

The number has been reduced to 15,201.

Mr. PRETYMAN

asked whether it is with his knowledge and sanction that the land valuation department are refusing to report agreed figures of valuation of real estate for probate until their provisional valuations for Land Value Duties have been agreed to by executors?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

It is considered of great importance that the original value, where there has been no alteration since the 30th April, 1909, should be recorded at the same amount as the value for Estate Duty purposes, and for this reason instructions have been issued to valuers that valuations for both purposes are to be completed at one and the same time.

Mr. PRETYMAN

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the dates do not coincide in any case except where the death takes place on the 30th of April, 1909?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

That may be, but there may have been no alteration of value.

Mr. CASSEL

Is it not possible that there, may have been an alteration?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

Yes, and in that case the treatment is different.

Mr. PRETYMAN

I did not quite gather from the right hon. Gentleman's answer whether he is telling the House that he is totalling up these valuations of Death Duties, even where the figures are identical, and where they disagree and are not identical sanction is being withheld until the valuation for the land tax has been made.

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

I did not make that statement.

Mr. PRETYMAN

That point is in my question.

Mr. PRETYMAN

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman will give instructions to the Inland Revenue Commissioners to suspend any valuations or claims affected by matters now sub judice, or as to which appeals have been lodged, until the interpretation of the law has been settled; and whether the Commissioners' interpretation of Section 25 (4) (c) as to deductions for that part of the total value directly attributable to the appropriation of land for the purpose of streets, roads, etc., is based upon the advice of the Law Officers of the Crown?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

The answer to the first part of the question is that my right hon. Friend does not consider it advisable to take the action suggested by the hon. Member. It is open to any person aggrieved by a determination of the Commissioners to give notice of objection or appeal in the manner prescribed by law, and where this step is taken the Commissioners do everything in their power to-avoid the trouble and expense of a multiplicity of appeals involving the same question. As regards the last part of the question, the Commissioners' interpretation is based upon the advice of their own legal adviser.

Mr. PRETYMAN

Are we to understand that the interpretation which the Commissioners place upon the law is being enforced upon poor owners, even where there is a case sub judice?

Mr. PRETYMAN

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman will now give instructions that forms issued by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue drawing attention to the benefits of Section 2, Subsection (3), of the Finance Act shall also draw attention to the extension of that benefit conferred by the Revenue Act of 1910–11; will he give instructions that in all cases where such documents have been issued the owners shall be fully informed of their legal privileges; and whether an extension of time will be given to any owners who would have been entitled to apply for substituted site value but have not done so owing to this omission?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

I am much obliged to the hon. Member for calling my attention to this matter. As stated in reply to a question of the hon. Member on the 7th instant, a revised form (which calls attention to the extended benefit conferred by Section 2 of the Revenue Act, 1911), is now in general use and steps will be taken to ensure that it is always issued in future. In any cases where the old form has by inadvertence been used after the passing of the Revenue Act, 1911, and owing to this a substituted site value was not claimed at the proper time, the Commissioners will be prepared still to entertain such a claim provided that it is made within a reasonable time after the owner becomes aware of his full legal privilege.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

asked what are the latest available figures of the yield of Increment Value Duty and Undeveloped Land Duty since the passing of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

Up to the 7th instant the yield of Increment Value Duty and Undeveloped Land Duty was approximately £1,950 and £13,900 respectively.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

Would it not be possible to enter in the periodical Return issued to Members the different heads, instead of lumping them altogether under "Land Value Duties"?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

We will consider that question.

Mr. CASSEL

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state how many valuations had by the 1st November, 1911, been finally settled?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

The information desired by the hon. and learned Gentleman is not available. 1,337,153 hereditaments have been valued and provisional valuations with regard to them issued, but it is not possible, without elaborate inquiries of all the district valuers to say in how many of these cases no objection had been raised on or before the 1st instant to the provisional valuation.

Mr. CASSEL

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me an answer to my question if I postpone it for such a period as will enable him to obtain the information?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

I cannot promise to obtain the information because it would require such an amount of time on the part of the district valuer that it would interfere with the work of valuation, which I understand hon. Members on all sides of the House desire to see proceeded with as speedily as possible.

Mr. CASSEL

Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that it would take so long to ascertain what number of valuations are finally settled when he is able to give me the number that have been provisionally settled?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

Yes, I certainly do suggest that.

Mr. CASSEL

asked whether the district valuers are acting under instructions from the Inland Revenue Commissioners in excluding from their valuations of house property in Hull and other large towns the space between rows of back-to-back houses, notwithstanding the fact that this space is the property of the owner of the houses and is not subject to any public rights of way?

Mr. McKINNON WOOD

District valuers have not been instructed to exclude—and are not excluding—from their valuations the space between rows of back-to-back houses, or any similar passages. But, where such spaces or passages are used in common by the occupiers of several adjacent properties, it is the practice to state on the face of the provisional valuation the net area of each property, excluding the passage. The valuation, however, should—and does include the proper proportion of the value of the space or passage in each case.