§ 2. Mr. David Howellasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what further steps he is taking to relieve understaffing and overloading in the Department of Inland Revenue.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Roy Jenkins)I am now studying the Report of the Select Committee on Estimates which was published last week and contains recommendations of these matters.
§ Mr. HowellWould the Chancellor of the Exchequer accept that this report greatly reinforces the case for moving to a simpler self-assessment method of taxation, particularly in the non-P.A.Y.E. sector? Is he aware of the very unfavourable comparison between our own Inland Revenue and the American Inland Revenue service, where about the same number of revenue staff handle more than three times as many personal tax returns?
§ Mr. JenkinsI would not agree with all that the hon. Gentleman says. This is a complex matter which, like many other matters raised by the Estimates Committee—and I value its report—needs to be studied carefully, but in not too leisurely a way.
§ Mr. BarnettIs not this matter very much over-stated? Are not inspectors of taxes finding it much simpler to deal with corporation tax computations whilst clerks deal with the majority of capital gains computations, and, is it not a fact that inspectors of taxes, having dealt with most of the back duty cases arising on bank interest disclosures, are now actually looking for new work by making capital checks on individual taxpayers?
§ Mr. JenkinsI have not actually heard of that but my impression is—indeed, it is more than an impression; it is my belief—that there is serious overstrain in the Inland Revenue Department, though I think that this could be exaggerated.