HC Deb 28 June 1951 vol 489 cc151-2W
61. Mr. A. Lewis

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what basis Entertainments Duty is charged on cinemas, dog and horse racing, speedway and motor racing, live theatres, boxing, cricket, football and athletics, respectively; what is the rate of tax in each instance; and what flat rate of tax chargeable on all forms of entertainment would be necessary to ensure the same revenue to the Treasury as envisaged in the Budget proposals.

Mr. Jay:

Of the entertainments mentioned by my hon. Friend, the full scale of duty applies to cinemas, dog racing, horse racing, speedway and motor racing, while the reduced scale applies, in general, to theatres, boxing, cricket, football and athletics.

The various rates of duty under the two scales are set out in Part II of the Fifth Schedule to the Finance Act, 1943, and in the Seventh Schedule to the Finance Act, 1948, respectively. Specific examples showing the duty included in particular admission prices were given in reply to a previous Question asked by my hon. Friend on 3rd May.

The answer to the last part of the Question is about 33⅓ per cent. on total receipts.

62. Mr. A. Lewis

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of Entertainments Duty paid by the speedway tracks for the month of April in the years 1950 and 1951, respectively.

Mr. Jay:

Particulars of receipts of Entertainments Duty in respect of speedway racing are not available, but receipts of duty from admissions to all racing on which the full scale of duty is charged, other than horse and dog racing, were £69,500 in April, 1950, and £43,400 in April, 1951. In comparing these figures allowance should be made for special factors affecting receipts in April this year, in particular bad weather.

63. Mr. A. Lewis

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amounts of entertainment duty paid by the Hastings, Hull, Middlesbrough, Wombwell, Tamworth, Sheffield, West Ham, New Cross, Cradley Heath, Liverpool, Fleetwood and Southampton speedway racing tracks in the month of May for the years 1950 and 1951, respectively.

Mr. Jay:

It would be contrary to established practice to give details of tax paid by particular taxpayers.