§ 52. Mr LINDSAYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the Board of Inland Revenue are demanding £l per cent. on the new capital of companies, and, if so, will he state the authority under which they are acting?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINNo, Sir. Companies which desire to anticipate payment of the increased duty which will become due as from 20th April on the passage of the Finance Bill into law are being allowed to do so; but care is taken in all such cases to make sure that the present legal position is clearly understood by the taxpayer. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of a printed notice which is displayed in the Companies Registration Offices and which he will see leaves no room for doubt on this point.
§ Mr. LINDSAYMay I ask whether it is not the case that 20 years ago Sir Michael Hicks-Beach endeavoured to secure a similar increase on the strength of a Resolution passed in Committee of Ways and Means, and had to abandon the attempt?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI do not know about a precedent of 20 years ago, but my hon. Friend is mistaken in the assumption in which he persists, in spite of the answer I have given, that we are attempting to enforce collection on a Resolution without legal authority. This Resolution was not declared by the House to have that legal authority, and where the payment is being made at the moment it is being made voluntarily. We shall collect it, if it is not made now, when the Act passes into law.