§ 69. Mrs. Braddockasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been drawn to the difficulties of boxing promotions due to the rate of entertainment tax; that the position of the Liverpool Stadium Promotions is typical of the rest of the country; that Liverpool Stadium promoted 28 shows from September, 1952, to 16th April, 1953, and paid£4,272 tax and lost£2,804; and if, in order to save the boxing promotions from ceasing altogether, he will reconsider the rate of tax.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterI have noted the information given in regard to the Liverpool Stadium. In regard to the first and last parts of the Question, the British Boxing Board of Control made representations to me in this sense before the Budget. These were carefully considered and, as the hon. Lady is aware, my right hon. Friend has introduced an exemption from Entertainments Duty covering amateur boxing and a reduction of Purchase Tax covering sports equipment.
120W
§ 70. Mrs. Braddockasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish in HANSARD the statement and figures regarding boxing promotions submitted to him by the deputation which he received from the British Boxing Board of Control since the imposition of the increased tax in 1952.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterNo.
§ Mr. P. Thomasasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give an estimate of the annual cost to the Treasury of exempting from Entertainment Duty those cinemas which, on 31st December, 1952, had a seating capacity of under 400 and whose weekly takings were below£150.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterAbout£600,000 a year, initially; but since any such concession could not be restricted to such cinemas at the particular date in question, the eventual cost would, as explained in the reply to my hon. Friend's question on 23rd October, 1952, be considerably greater.