64. Mr. GODFREY LOCKER-LAMP-SONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the estimated penalisation of marriage if the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Income Tax are adopted of not treating married people as separate taxable entities?
§ Mr. BALDWINI am not in a position to give figures showing the relief from Income Tax which would accrue to married persons by the adoption of a system of separate assessment as compared with the system recommended by the Royal Commission on the Income Tax.
Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSONMay I ask if the hon. Gentleman still adheres to the statement made last year that the imposition of this tax on marriage is an intolerable anomaly?
§ Mr. BALDWINPerhaps my hon. Friend will raise the question on the Finance Bill.
65. Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the number of local assessors of Income Tax at present employed; and what is the total amount of remuneration at present paid to them?
§ Mr. BALDWINLocal assessors are in all but a very few instances also collectors of Income Tax. There are over 4,000 of these officers, and the proportion of remuneration payable to them as assessors for the year 1919–20 is estimated at £41,000, exclusive of war bonus.
§ Sir J. REMNANTIs it the intention of the Government to do away with these local assessors?
§ Mr. BALDWINThe intention of the Government will be made clear later on.
Sir F. HALLDoes the hon. Gentleman recognise the fact that there is a strong feeling against these officers being done 1840 away with, as they are practically the only buffer the people have got, and will the Government and the Chancellor of the Exchequer take the general opinion into consideration and retain their services?
§ Mr. BALDWINWe quite realise that. I am all in favour of buffers.
66. Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSONasked what number of claims by English residents and persons residing abroad are dealt with by the Claims Department?
§ Mr. BALDWINThe numbers of claims dealt with in the Claims Branch of the Inland Revenue Department for the year ended 31st March, 1920, are:—
By English residents … 790,000 By persons residing abroad … 18,500
§ 67. Mr. FOREMANasked whether the Royal Commission on Income Tax specifically considered the extension of the grant of a travelling allowance in the case of weekly wage-earners in manual labour to those engaged in clerical work, particularly as their remuneration is often less?
§ Mr. BALDWINThe question of the allowance for Income Tax purposes of travelling expenses incurred by a taxpayer in going from his place of residence to his business is dealt with in paragraph 236 (c) of the Report of the Royal Commission on the Income Tax, to which I would refer my hon. Friend.
§ 68. SirC. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give the grounds on which the Special Commissioners of Income Tax have decided that officers of the Volunteer Force who were enrolled for purposes of home defence are debarred from the benefits conferred by Section 51 of The Income Tax Act, 1918?
§ Mr. BALDWINRelief from Super-Tax under Section 51 of the Income Tax Act, 1918, is given to officers of the Voluntter Force, who, during the year for which the relief is claimed, had served either on full pay or at a rate of pay equivalent to full pay for at least one month continuously in the British Islands (see Section 52 of the Income Tax Act, 1918). If my hon. Friend will furnish particulars of any case in which relief was due, but has not been given, I will cause inquiry to be made