HC Deb 15 April 1991 vol 189 cc10-1W
Mr. Dewar

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish a table, consistent with table 6 of his answer to the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Summerson) of 13 December,Official Report, columns 457–58, providing an otherwise identical analysis of the planning total.

Mr. Mellor

The information requested is given in the table. The figures reflect the estimates of the planning total available when the data reported in theOfficial Report on 13 December were prepared.

Mr. Maude

The tax involved was that applicable to investors' interest and dividends paid in the period between 1 October 1985 and 5 April 1986. The House of Lords decided that the Inland Revenue had power to make regulations bringing these payments of interest and dividends into account but not to charge tax at rates in force for 1985–86.

Mr. Peter Bottomley

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) on how many occasions the courts have ruled against the Government to the effect that the Woolwich Equitable building society should not have to pay extra tax following the 1985 Budget speech;

(2) if he will arrange for the judgments in the various Woolwich Equitable building society tax cases to be placed in the Library.

Mr. Maude

There have been two judgments in favour of the Woolwich Equitable building society in litigation over the application of the transitional provisions in the 1986 Building Societies Regulations.

In July 1987 the High Court held that the Inland Revenue did not have power to make regulations that sought to bring into account payments made by societies in transitional periods before 6 April 1986. That decision was reversed by the Court of Appeal in April 1989. In October 1990 the House of Lords concluded that the Revenue had power to bring the payments in the transitional periods into account but not to charge tax at the rates in force for 1985–86.

Copies of the judgments are available in the Library.