HC Deb 01 May 1922 vol 153 cc1040-1

If that view be adopted it means that I shall be left with a surplus of£38,300,000 for the reduction of taxation. How ought it to be applied? I have not been without advice on this subject. I have received numerous deputations and innumerable letters and the Press have not been lacking in suggestions, but it is now a long time since I made up my mind as to what direction such a reduction should take. I hesitate to make that statement. I am very reluctant to disclose the fact that my mind has not been made up for me during the last few days by letter writing, and petitions organised by active journalists. I do not wish to discourage these petitions because they help the revenues of the Post Office.

The Income Tax is the tax which bears our heaviest burden, and it is the one which most affects trade. I remember years ago, before I was a Member of this House, reading a speech by the right hon. Member for Paisley (Mr. Asquith)—I think he was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time—in which he descanted upon the evils of a high Income Tax in relation to commerce and industry, and everything that he said then has been emphasised and confirmed by our recent experiences. I have received numerous deputations of commercial men who have assured me that the best way to help trade and commerce to-day is to bring about some mitigation of the burden of the Income Tax. Accordingly I propose to reduce the Income Tax by 1s. in the pound. The cost to the Exchequer for the full year will be£52,000,000, but as the Committee knows the tax is collected by instalments and there are always arrears, so that I estimate that the actual cost in the coming year will be£32,500,000. The change will, of course, run as from the 6th April.