HC Deb 19 June 1930 vol 240 cc579-82
60. Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a copy of the Treasury Minute laying down the conditions under which exemptions from taxation have hitherto been given to consuls and consular agents of foreign countries?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN

The Treasury concession, upon which the practice of the Board of Inland Revenue has been based in regard to the taxation of consuls and consular agents of foreign countries, was set out in two Treasury letters, one issued in 1842 and one in 1854. It is not customary to publish inter-Departmental correspondence of this character and ordinarily it would be undesirable to do so, but as these letters are nearly a hundred years old I will circulate copies of them in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN

Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the same time circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the exact reference to the report of the Public Accounts Committee in which they called attention to the non-statutory exemption of consuls and their servants from Income Tax?

Mr. SNOWDEN

That, of course, does not arise out of this question. The most specific reference to this matter was in the Report of the Public Accounts Committee of 1913.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN

Did that relate specifically to the consular service?

Mr. SNOWDEN

No, I never said it did. I said it was a general reference to the undesirability of extra-statutory exemption.

Mr. BECKETT

On a point of Order.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND rose

——

Mr. SPEAKER

Does tale supplementary question which the right hon. Member desires to ask arise out of the original question?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

It arises directly out of the question.

Mr. BECKETT

Is it in order, after you have called upon a Member to put a question, for Front Bench Members to go on asking supplementary questions?

Mr. SPEAKER

It does not matter whether it is a Front Bench Member or anyone else. Sometimes I call upon an hon. Member without seeing the hon. Member who rises, and in that case I give the latter an opportunity of asking his supplementary question.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

May I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the concession given was by a series of letters or whether it was by a Treasury Minute as we were given to understand at the time of the debate, and what were the reasons—if he can tell us—why the production of the document in question was withheld at the time?

Mr. SNOWDEN

There never was a Treasury Minute—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] There never was a Treasury Minute except in the imagination of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for St. George's (Sir L. Worthington-Evans).

Sir K. WOOD

You said so. I heard it.

Mr. SNOWDEN

I never said so. I never used the words "Treasury Minute." The right hon. Gentleman has made a baseless insinuation. The words which I used are correctly reported in the OFFICIAL REPORT, and the words were these: Some criticism was made by the Public Accounts Committee about the continuance of the relief of Consuls from Income Tax under a Treasury concession"— and then the right hon. Gentleman intervened and said: Will the right hon. Gentleman read the Treasury Minute?"—[OFFICIAL EFFORT, 17th June, 1930; col. 62, Vol. 240.] That was the first reference to a Treasury Minute, and I never used the words "Treasury Minute" during the whole course of the debate. It is no part of my business to correct the imagination of the right hon. Gentleman.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

May I, Mr. Speaker——

Mr. SPEAKER

We cannot debate this question now.

Following are copies of the letters:

"Gentlemen,

I am commanded by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury to transmit to you herewith for your information copy of a letter from the Foreign Office dated 5th instant and of its enclosure a letter from the French Ambassador stating the grounds on which he requests that the French Vice-Consul at Liverpool may be exempted from the payment of Income Tax, and I have to state that as it appears from Count Walewski's communication that the French Vice-Consul at Liverpool is forbidden to trade, and that his emoluments are derived directly from the French Government My Lords consider that he is clearly exempt from payment of Income Tax, and that no claim should be made upon him in that respect. My Lords understand that the practice has hitherto been for the officers of Inland Revenue to abstain from assessing Consuls of Foreign States to the Income Tax in respect of salary or other payments made to them from their own Governments or in respect of tonnage on ships of the Country or State for which they act, being an impost authorised by the foreign Government, or on any fees paid to them by subjects of such Governments, but that Consuls have not been considered exempt from the duty on profits arising from Fees paid to them by British subjects. It appears, however, from Count Walewski's letter that the dues of all kinds received by French Consular Agents are regularly paid over to the French Government, and My Lords consider that if will be better to adopt a general rule for the future in regard to fees received by all Foreign Consuls. My Lords are therefore pleased to authorise you to instruct your officers not to require for the future any returns from Consuls of Foreign States in respect of Fees paid to them in this country in that capacity, whether by subjects of the country for which they act, or by British subjects, it being, however, clearly understood that such exemption shall not apply to Consuls carrying on Trade in this country as relieving them from Income Tax on their commercial profits.

I am, Gentlemen,

Your obedient Servant,

(Sgd.) JAMES WILSON."

Treasury Chambers, 28th July, 1854.

"Gentlemen,

In reference to the correspondence on the subject of the liability of the French Consul-General to assessment under the Income Tax; I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury to acquaint you, that those Foreign Consuls, who derive their whole emoluments from the salaries received by them from a Foreign State, do not appear to My Lords to be properly subject to the payment of the Income Tax, or to be required to return their Incomes to the assessors, and I am at the same time to desire, you will govern yourselves accordingly.

I am, Gentlemen,

Your obedient Servant,

(Sgd.) THOS. FREEMANTLE."

Treasury Chambers,

21st September, 1842.

Forward to