HC Deb 22 April 1918 vol 105 c717

I come now to the last of the sources of Revenue which are included in the £114,000,000 I mentioned to the House. I propose an additional tax on sugar of 11s. 8d. per cwt. That will bring in during the current year £12,400,000, and in a full year £13,200,000. I wish, if I can, to justify this on the same grounds as the other taxes can be justified. The price of sugar is fixed. At present it averages 5 ¾ d. per lb., and with this addition the cost will be 7d. per lb. I ask the Committee to consider the extent of that burden upon the individual. The ration of sugar is ½ lb. per week; the duty is l ¼ d. per lb. Therefore, the burden upon each consumer is l ¼ d. per fortnight. I may point out also that, considering the price of other commodities, sugar will still be sold at a not unreasonable price.

I would put this finally to the Committee. It really was absolutely necessary to have additions to indirect taxation. If anyone in the House feels inclined to consider that any particular tax is too hard on some persons, they should try to find out from what other sources the Revenue can be obtained. I should like to add this. In considering the amount of this indirect taxation, it ought not to be left out of account—it is very important that it should be remembered—that a subsidy is now paid on the loaf. It is really relieving those, who would naturally pay this indirect taxation, and this subsidy amounts to more than the total of the additional indirect taxation which I am now placing before the Committee. I am not going to argue the question, on which I know there is a difference of opinion, as to whether or not it was wise to make that subsidy, but, from the point of view of the effect upon the poorer classes of the country, I have no hesitation whatever in saying that the indirect taxation which I propose is more than counterbalanced by the subsidy which was given on the cost of the loaf. That makes the total amount of new taxation which I mentioned.

Back to
Forward to