HC Deb 29 May 1934 vol 290 cc29-30

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the cost to the Exchequer of substituting an allowance of five-ninths of the standard rate of tax of 4s. 6d. in the £ on the first £175 of taxable income for the present allowance of one-half the standard rate and, alternatively, of restoring the allowance of five-ninths of the standard rate of 4s. 6d. in the £ on the first £250 of taxable income, which was in operation immediately prior to the passing of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1931, in place of the present allowance?


It is estimated that the alterations suggested in the question would cost about £4,000,000 and £13,000,000 respectively.


Having regard to the comparatively small sums involved, will the right (hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of making some concession to the poorest class of Income Taxpayers?


asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been drawn to the fact that, whereas Schedule A assessments are fixed and unalterable for five years where there is no change in the rental, the Board of Inland Revenue in cases of void periods, although no change has taken place in the rental value, make a practice of calculating gross re-assessments on the lower rent obtained, with consequential reduction of repairs allowance, thus depriving a property owner of a portion of the repairs allowance fixed by quinquennial assessment; and whether he will take action to assure that in future the appropriate quinquennial repairs allowance is made in all cases?


I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to the allowance for void periods, in the case of houses let in apartments or tenements, granted by Section 21 of the Finance Act, 1930. If this is so, perhaps he will supply me with particulars of any case in which he considers that the relief granted is inequitable when I will have the matter inquired into and communicate with him further.