§ Miss Lestorasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the decision in the case of Regina v. Top Ten Promotions Limited, he will introduce legislation to compensate the Spastics Society and other societies affected for the loss of £900,000 due to the operation of the Finance Act 1964.
§ Mr. Harold LeverNo. The House of Lords decision did not affect the position of voluntary contributions to the Spastics Society made by participants in the football pool in question; such contributions are not, and never have been, charged with duty. I understand that the organisers have stated that, had the decision gone in their favour, money which they had set aside to meet their liability if they lost the case would be given to the Spastics Society. But the fact that a taxpayer might make a contribution to charity if his tax liability were less is not a reason for Government compensation to the charity. Charities are not exempt from pool betting duty, but voluntary contributions made to them in connection with bets are exempt. Because of this, voluntary donations collected as part of the weekly payments made by members of the society have always been exempt from duty.