§ 49. Mr. G. Jegerasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the effect of advertising in stimulating spending; and whether he will discourage extensive advertising by refusing to allow expenditure on advertising to count for tax purposes.
§ The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Henry Brooke)My right hon. Friend does not see his way to propose as regards this particular kind of business expenditure, any amendment of the general rule of tax law allowing the deduction of expenditure that is wholly and exclusively laid out for the purposes of the trade.
§ Mr. JegerWould it not be much better to prohibit or prevent the stimulation of spending which arises from advertising paid out of taxation, rather than to increase prices and force people to spend more, as Government action is doing now?
§ Mr. BrookeA proposal less far-reaching than that of the hon. Gentleman was brought before the House in 1947 and received such an unfavourable reception that it was withdrawn by Sir Stafford Cripps.
Mr. H. WilsonDoes not the right hon. Gentleman think it extraordinary, at a time of year when the Chancellor is usually not anticipating his Budget statement, that he should be indicating that the Chancellor has closed his mind on the question? Secondly, since he refers to the proposals in the autumn Budget of 1947, is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reason given by Sir Stafford Cripps for reversing that proposal was a solemn and clear undertaking by the advertising profession and the F.B.I. that they would restrict the volume of advertising to the figures then obtaining, and that since that time the volume of advertising has more than doubled?
§ Mr. BrookeI well remember the circumstances of 1947, but my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not wishing, perhaps, to embarrass me by overmuch use of the phrase that I could not anticipate his Budget, authored me to make this statement today.