HC Deb 29 May 1930 vol 239 cc1478-80
72. Sir BASIL PETO

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, under the Finance Bill of 1930, it is intended that no deduction from Surtax shall under any circumstances be allowed in respect of the interest on money borrowed at any time on a whole life policy bought by a single payment, even if such payment has been made by the assured at the commencement of the contract; and, if so, whether the deduction for Surtax will be allowed on the interest on money borrowed on mortgage on property and, if not, under what circumstances will a deduction be allowed in computing income for Surtax?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Philip Snowden)

The hon. Baronet's question appears to contemplate a case in which borrowing on the security of a single premium policy is subsequent to and wholly unconnected with the payment of the premium. In such a case the Clause does not apply. As regards the latter part of the question, the proposals do not alter the existing law with regard to the allowance of interest on borrowings which have no relation to the payment of a premium on a contract of assurance.

73. Captain PEAKE

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what additions, in staff and expenditure, are necessitated by die proposal to revalue property in the Metropolitan area, under Clause 26 of the Finance Bill; and what additional revenue is calculated to result therefrom?

Mr. SNOWDEN

In the absence of experience, it is not possible to frame a close estimate of the cost. As compared with previous procedure, there will be some saving in the time of Inspectors of Taxes. On the other hand, some addition to the clerical staff will be required. On balance, it is not expected that the additional expenditure will exceed £15,000. The additional revenue is estimated at £500,000.

Captain PEAKE

Has it ever occurred to the right hon. Gentleman that considerable economy could be achieved by extending the admirable system which is at present in force in the Metropolitan area to the rest of the country?

Mr. MARJORIBANKS

Has the right hon. Gentleman, in framing his answer, considered the previous Clause which we were discussing the other night, and upon which the right hon. Gentleman was observed to be not particularly well informed?

Mr. SNOWDEN

I am taking the opportunity of consulting the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Marjoribanks), if I have any similar matters to deal with.

78. Brigadier-General BROWN

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that Income Tax authorities are insisting on tax being deducted at 4s. 6d. from dividends on securities which, although dated and falling due for payment before the 5th April, have not been actually paid into the bank before the middle and end of April; and whether he will give instructions that taxes should be deducted at the rate in force when the dividend becomes payable, as laid down in Section 39 of the Finance Act, 1927?

Mr. SNOWDEN

If the hon. and gallant Member will give particulars of any case which he has in mind, I will cause inquiry into it to be made and communicate the results to him in due course.

Brigadier-General BROWN

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have at least two cases, and I shall be glad to give him particulars of them.