HC Deb 17 April 1946 vol 421 cc2821-2

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Mr. Stanley

Could we have a short explanation of this rather complicated provision?

Mr. Glenvil Hall

It is complicated and rather technical but, briefly, the provision is that the Excess Profits Tax and the National Defence Contribution are alternative taxes, and the higher one goes, as against the one which would impose a lesser charge—I have here a note of an example which perhaps will explain it better than any amount of words.

Taking the liability for chargeable accounting periods during which both E.P.T. and N.D.C. are in operation, taking E.P.T. at about £500,000, and N.D.C. at £200,000, the £500,000 would be the amount charged and not the £200,000. If E.P.T. goes, as it is going, there may be some slop-over, so that the difference between £500,000 and £200,000 may make it appear that tax has been liquidated because, going back to N.D.C., it might be assumed by some people that there was £300,000 there to play with. What we are trying to do here —and the Finance Bill will see that we do it—is to see that that kind of thing does not arise. What will happen is that E.P.T. will come to an end and N.D.C. will go on, and N.D.C. will be the rate charged. This Resolution will see that that rate is charged.