HC Deb 01 July 1914 vol 64 cc341-3
18. Mr. G. LOCKER-LAMPSON

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give any estimate of the cost to the Exchequer of the relief from Income Tax to persons in respect of the depreciation of machinery on the prime cost, instead of, as now, on the written-down value only?

The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George)

I would point out to the hon. Member that if the basis on which the rate of allowance in respect of depreciation is to be calculated throughout is the prime cost, the percentage rate will be less than if this basis were the written-down value. In these circumstances, it does not appear that the depreciation allowance would cost more with one method than with the other.

22. Mr. F. HALL (DulWich)

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the advisability of taking off some of the present taxes on food instead of reducing the Income Tax as proposed, in order to strike a balance between the established revenue and the expenditure for the year?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I can add nothing to the statements already made in this House by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and myself.

26. Mr. WORTHINGTON EVANS

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the estimated amount of the income for each of the last three years arising from securities, stocks, shares, and rents in places out of the United Kingdom which would have been liable to Income Tax in Clause 5 of the Finance Bill had been enacted in 1909?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

Owing to the very fact that income accumulating abroad has hitherto been outside the scope of the Income Tax, it is only possible to give a roughly approximate estimate of the income which would have been brought into charge if Clause 5 had been operative in former years. As I stated, however, in the course of my Financial Statement, it is expected that the additional yield will ultimately amount to £1,000,000, which at 1s. 4d. in the £ represents the tax on £16,000,000, while the estimates on the basis of a rate of 1s. 3d. in the £, of £250,000 for 1914–15 and £470,000 for 1915–16, given in White Paper No. 293, represent tax on £4,000,000 and £7,500,000, respectively.

29. Mr. CASSEL

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why, in view of the fact that the cost of his concession to unearned incomes below £500 would be £370,000 in a full year, he has in his revised Budget only allowed £52,000, or less than one-sixth of this sum, in respect of this item?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

The figure of £370,000 was my estimate of the cost of the concession in a full year with a normal rate of 1s. 4d. in the £. With a normal rate of 1s. 3d. this figure becomes £245,000, as shown in White Paper No. 293. The comparatively small cost of the concession in 1914–15 is due to the fact that the relief must be given in the current year by way of repayment, and that taxpayers will thus not be in a position to claim it until the last quarter.

Mr. CASSEL

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that not one-fifth of the people entitled to relief get it during the year?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

Most Income Tax is collected towards the end of the year, and cases of repayment are discharged in the first and second quarters of the following year.