§ The CHAIRMAN
The Clause in the name of the hon. Member for Glasgow alters the incidence of the tax between landlord and tenant. If that be so, what it takes off one party it throws on to another, and it would, therefore, appear not to be in order.
Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT
On a point of Order. May I submit that this proposed Amendment does not involve a tax in any way? It does not increase the amount of tax which is collected by the Treasury. This Clause, No. 34, does not concern the amount of the tax which is paid. It only concerns the manner in which the person who has directly paid the tax is entitled to recoup himself, say, from his ground landlord, by deducting the amount from the rent which he is paying. Originally one was entitled to deduct from his ground landlord the amount of tax which he had paid. Clause 34 in last year's Finance Bill 942 alters that in Scotland, and a man is no longer entitled to deduct what he has paid. He is only entitled to deduct the amount of the tax as it stood at the beginning of the period without respect to any increase in the tax during the period. The effect is that the man who has directly paid the tax is out of pocket by that amount and the landlord is in pocket to that extent. The effect of my proposal is simply to reinstate the previous condition of affairs whereby the man who has paid the tax, as it stands, is entitled to deduct that amount from the landlord when he pays the rent.
§ The CHAIRMAN
The hon. Member has very clearly stated his position. Take a particular case between the hon. Member and myself. There is a charge which certainly the Treasury is entitled to. The question is as to which of us has to bear the amount, and in what proportion. The hon. Member proposes to alter the existing law so that I should pay less and he would pay more, but I must protest against that proposal being introduced in Ways and Means. It requires a preliminary Resolution.