57. Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSONasked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Government will pay the expenses of a test case in the Courts in regard to the legality of treating a wife's income as part of her husband's income for purposes of Income Tax?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Chamberlain)No, Sir. Under the existing law, the legality is, I think, indisputable.
Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSONCould the right hon. Gentleman get the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown on the subject?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINI see no occasion to make further inquiries. The people who are most interested in this matter are wealthy people, and can test it in the Courts if they wish.
§ Mr. BILLINGSurely the people most penalised are not wealthy people?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINThe people who would obtain most relief by separate assessment of the incomes of husband and wife are rich people, and not poor people.
§ Viscount CURZONIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that a class of people who are very hard hit are naval officers—not rich people?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINI do not think they are harder hit than people of similar means in other walks of life. I would remind my Noble and gallant Friend that the rates of pay of naval officers have recently been revised on a very generous scale.
§ Sir E. CARSONIs the right hon. Gentlemen not aware that, certainly in the case of junior officers, nearly all the benefit of the increased pay has been taken away by the change in regard to Income Tax?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINNo, Sir. The Income Tax exemption was, as my right hon. and learned Friend knows, a special War-time exemption, which it was never intended should continue after the War, and it was expressly decided at the time the new increases of pay were made that the special Income Tax exemption should cease.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEWill the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of making further inquiries in regard to wife and husband? If he does so, I am sure he will find that he is mistaken with regard to the rich people?