§ 26. Mr. PRETYMANasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why the tables issued with their Annual Report by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue show a comparison between the yield of Income Budget Estimates, but no such figures are given in respect of the Land Taxes; and can he state to the House what his Budget Estimates were for Increment Value Duty, Undeveloped Land Duty, and Reversion Duty for the years 1910–11 and 1911–12, respectively?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George)I regret that the figures relating to the several Land Value Duties, which had been made public in my Budget Statement for the year 1911–12 were inadvertently omitted from the Annual Report of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. I am having them circulated with the Votes. [See Written Answers this date.]
§ 27. Mr. PRETYMANasked why no reference is made in the Annual Report of the Inland Revenue Commissioners to the decisions given by Referees on appeals heard by them upon cases arising out of the valuation for the Land Taxes?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe decision of a Referee has no binding effect apart from the particular case which is referred to him; and it is not the practice to publish decisions of this character in the Annual Report, of the Commissioners.
§ Mr. PRETYMANThat the decision of the Referee not a binding effect on the parties concerned?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGECertainly. As I have said, it has a binding effect in the particular case.
§ Mr. PRETYMANIs it not, in the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman, very important for parties who have similar cases with the Inland Revenue to know what the decisions of the Referees are, and in that way get information?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI think there is a good deal to be said for publishing cases bearing on some question of principle. I have been considering that question. I do not think it would be advisable to publish the decision in every case, and I am not sure that the parties would really care for that. At any rate, I do think there is a 1901 good deal to be said for publishing the decisions in cases which involve matters of principle.
§ Mr. PRETYMANThen I will repeat my question a little later on, when the right hon. Gentleman has had a little time to consider the matter.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI will be glad if the hon. Member will do so.
§ 28. Mr. PRETYMANasked whether 2,240 valuations made in Ireland on occasions when Increment Value Duty was presumed to be payable have only yielded £34 to the revenue; and whether, in view of the unremunerative character of these proceedings, he will issue instructions that the valuation of land in Ireland be no further proceeded with?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGETwo thousand two hundred and forty occasion valuations were made in Ireland in the year 1911–12, but they were made without consideration whether duty was, or was not, presumably payable. In the same year £34 was collected out of £119 assessed as Increment Value Duty on occasions of transfers on sale and leases of land. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. PRETYMANIs it not the case that in every transfer, whether in England or Ireland, a valuation has to be made on the presumption that Increment Value Duty is payable or may be payable?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe answer I have given is that the valuations were made without consideration whether duty was or was not presumably payable.
§ 29. Mr. PRETYMANasked the yield to the revenue of Increment Value Duty, Undeveloped Land Duty, and Reversion Duty, respectively, for the first six months of the current financial year?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI will refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Oswestry.
§ 32. Mr. LANE-FOXasked the number of occasional valuations on 30th September, 1912, for which particulars have been duly lodged, but for which valuations have not yet been made?
§ 37. Mr. EDWARD WOODasked whether there are any, and, if so, how many, valuations arising on occasions for which particulars were lodged before the 31st December, 1910, and which are still outstanding; and when are these to be finished?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGETo obtain the information asked for would involve an expenditure of labour and time in valuation offices all over the country that I hardly think is justified by the object.
§ 33. Mr. LANE-FOXasked whether any valuations are being made by unqualified valuers, that is to say, by men who are not members of the Surveyors' Institution or of the Auctioneers' Institute?
§ 39. Mr. NEWMANasked the number of qualified valuers on the valuation staff on 30th September, 1912?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGENo valuations are being made by unqualified valuers. The number of valuers on the valuation staff for England and Wales on the 30th September was 758. Of these, 466 hold certificates of the Surveyors' Institution or Auctioneers' Institute; of the remaining, none were appointed who were not found to be, fully-qualified valuers by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue.
§ Mr. PRETYMANWhat is the standard of qualification?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI should like to have notice of that question.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYDoes the number 758 refer to the number of principal valuers or does it include assistant valuers?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI think it includes the whole of the valuation staff.
§ Mr. LANE-FOXDoes the right hon. Gentleman mean that those who are found not to be qualified have not been employed to make any valuations?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGECertainly.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe number of occasional valuations made in Great Britain, up to and including 30th September, 1912, was 403,527.
§ 35. Mr. ROYDSasked the number of, and area included in, the valuations made to the 30th of September, 1912?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe number of provisional valuations made and served in Great Britain, up to and including 30th September, 1912, was 2,583,453. These valuations related to 3,256,568 hereditaments, and included approximately 7,243,764 acres.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYare there not over 11,000,000 hereditaments, and if so, when does the right hon. Gentleman expect the valuation will be completed?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI should not like to answer a question of that sort without notice.