§ 2.42 p.m.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government if the general experience of the use of luncheon vouchers in shops and offices has not been that it is accompanied by improved health and a smaller liability to seasonal infections, and, if so, whether they will not seriously consider raising the exemption from income tax on these vouchers to 5s.]
THE EARL OF HOMEMy Lords, as noble friend the Minister without Portfolio is ill, perhaps the noble Lord will forgive me if I reply. As no doubt, the noble Lord is aware, the income tax treatment of luncheon vouchers has recently been considered by my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He fully appreciated that the use of luncheon vouchers may be regarded as beneficial to health, and, indeed, it was partly because of this that he has decided to continue the concession under which, subject to certain conditions, an employee may receive vouchers of up to 3s. a day without being charged tax upon them. This concession means, however, that the recipients of luncheon vouchers are in a favoured position over the rest of the community, and my right honourable friend does not think that he would be justified in increasing their tax advantage by raising the limit of exemption to 5s.
LORD SALTOUNMy Lords, while thanking the noble Earl for his answer and appreciating the difficulties under which he is labouring, I should like to ask him whether any restaurant in the City of London can supply a reasonable lunch for 3s., and also ask him whether on any day during the month before this Question was tabled the noble Earl himself lunched anywhere for 3s.
LORD GRENFELLIs the noble Earl aware that the 3s. limit does discriminate greatly against employees of firms without canteens, and it is estimated that some canteens provide meals which would normally cost between 5s. and 6s.