§ 75. Commander Nobleasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why motor cycle speedway racing is not classified as a live entertainment.
§ 77. Mr. J. Johnsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why speedway racing is classified as a non-live sport, and thus is subject to the tax rating of approximately 48 per cent., while football and boxing enjoy the lower rate of 15 per cent.
§ Mr. GaitskellIt is not correct to suppose that the higher rate of Entertainments Duty is intended to apply only to those forms of entertainment in which human beings play no direct part. The higher rate applies to horse racing and motor racing, as well as to cinemas and greyhound racing. I reviewed the position before the Budget in the light of the representations which had been made to me and, like my predecessors, came to the conclusion that speedway racing was properly classed with the other forms of racing that I have mentioned rather than with the entertainments which qualify for the reduced scale of duty.
§ 76. Mr. J. Johnsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the total yield of entertainment tax upon speedway racing in 1950; and what 126W would have been the yield under a tax rating similar to that of football and boxing.
§ Mr. GaitskellSeparate figures of receipts of Entertainments Duty from admissions to speedway meetings are not available, but receipts of duty in 1950 from admissions to speedway and other motor-cycle and motor racing amounted to approximately £550,000. The corresponding revenue on the basis of the reduced rates of duty would depend on a number of factors which cannot be predicted with certainty, but it is estimated that it would be in the region of £150,000.
§ Mr. A. Lewisasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the estimated loss to Exchequer funds if the entertainment duty paid by the speedway industry were paid on the basis of being classified and charged under the heading of a live sport.
§ Mr. GaitskellIf it was justifiable to apply the reduced rates of Entertainments Duty to speedway racing while withholding the concession from other forms of racing at present charged under the same scale, the loss of revenue would be in the region of £400,000 a year.
§ Mr. A. Lewisasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give the reasons why, for the purpose of charging entertainment duty, he has classified the speedway entertainment industry as a non-live sport.
§ Mr. GaitskellI would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave today to my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mr. J. Johnson), and to the hon. and gallant Member for Chelsea (Commander Noble).
§ Mr. A. Lewisasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that speedway racing is acknowledged to be a skilled sport, dependent entirely upon the efforts of the live drivers; and whether he will classify this sport as such for entertainment duty.
§ Mr. GaitskellI am aware of the skill required in speedway racing, but this is not a factor determining liability to Entertainments Duty.