§ The next change raises the thorny question of the Land Values Duties. I regret that on this subject neither the Government nor Parliament have derived any guidance from the Select Committee which was appointed last Session; but the evidence laid before the Committee has been presented to the House and will, I think, be sufficient to enable the House to come to a decision. It is, I believe, universally felt, whatever division of opinion there may be, that for the reasons which I indicated last year, these duties in their present form are unworkable. They have produced hardly any revenue, and, from a variety of causes into which I will not now enter, they are, with the exception of the Mineral Rights Duty, either wholly or partially in abeyance, and can only be revived, if at all, by proposing legislation of a highly technical character. In these circumstances, if Parliament ever wishes to levy duties of that character it will have to begin over again. We have come to the conclusion that the proper course for us to pursue is to repeal the duties.
Mr. CHAMBERLAINThat is a foolish observation. The hon. Member obviously does not understand Cabinet procedure. Does he think that a decision of this kind was taken in the absence of the Prime Minister, or without his full concurrence or approval? We have 84 unanimously come to the conclusion that the proper course to pursue is to repeal these duties, with the exception of the Mineral Rights Duty, which is a simple tax, offering no practical difficulties of administration. The question thereupon arises as to the course to be pursued in reference to arrears of duties which are outstanding. These arrears include duty which has been assessed, but which is unpaid, and duty which, owing to adverse decisions in the Courts and for other reasons, it has been impracticable even to bring into assessment. In numerous instances the arrears date back to the very inception of the duty. It will be recalled that no Undeveloped Land Duty has been assessed since 1914, although the duty is an annual one. The collection of arrears in such conditions is clearly impracticable, but any decision to give up the arrears raises at once the question of the duties which have already been paid. In that connection I must bring to the Committee's notice the statement made by my predecessor, Mr. McKenna, on the 1st April, 1916, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, that as regards the payment of Undeveloped Land Duty there would be no eventual discrimination. In the circumstances the repayment of Undeveloped Land Duty, where paid, must be authorised, and in that event I think the Committee will probably feel that Increment Value Duty and Reversion Duty should be dealt with on the same lines. I will only add this observation.
5.0 P.M.
Since the date when Mr. McKenna spoke, conditions have changed to an extent which no man could foresee, and I cannot help feeling that in the quite exceptional circumstances which have resulted from the duration of the War, which broke out at a time when otherwise the whole problem of the Land Duties would have come under review, many taxpayers will be content to let bygones be bygones, and will at any rate refrain, in cases where the duty is small and insignificant, from reclaiming it now from the Exchequer. In the ordinary course, I should have expected to receive some £500,000 from the Mineral Rights Duty and the Excess Mineral Rights Duty. It might be anticipated, under the circumstances I have described, that part of this sum will be swallowed up by repayment, 85 but I have left £500,000 standing in the White Paper as a conventional figure.