§ 55. Mr. Boyd-Carpenterasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why he is insisting upon the payment of interest by a Kingston-upon-Thames resident, particulars of whom have been sent to him, arising from a tax liability which was not assessed until two years after the date from which interest is charged.
§ Mr. GaitskellMy hon. Friend the Financial Secretary has already written to the hon. Member about this case. The tax liability in question was the Special Contribution, and the Finance Act, 1948, specifically provided that where the contribution, whether already assessed or not, was not paid by 1st January, 1949, it should carry interest at the rate of 2 per cent. per annum from that date to the date of payment.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that when the Finance Act, 1948, went through this House no indication was given to this House that the Inland Revenue would take this long time to assess the tax demand? Does the right hon. Gentleman pretend that it is consistent with equity and justice that when a new tax demand arrives it should have added to it two years' arrears of interest? In view of the fact that the Finance Bill is before this House at the moment, will not the right hon. Gentleman take steps to remedy it?
§ Mr. GaitskellI cannot agree that the responsibility is entirely with the Inland Revenue. The general question was however fully discussed during the passage of the Bill.
§ Mr. NabarroIs not the proper answer to this the recruitment of an adequate 1181 number of trained skilled staff for the Inland Revenue which at present is so short of staff?
§ Mr. GaitskellWe have that very much in mind.