THE BRITISH BUDGET

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 178, 23 April 1920, Page 7

THE BRITISH BUDGET

.• _* —. — r ■ OPPOSITION TO INCREASE IN EXCESS PROFITS TAX ; ''. ■ EXPENDITURE ON SUPPLY SERVICE By Telcffraph—Press Association—Copyright '■" " ■ ."'; - London, April 20. Indications are that tho principal op- . position to tho Budget will centre on; tho' ■ increase in the excess profit, stax. Trading bodies have begua a formidable campaign. Mr. Terrell, chairman of the Manufacturers' Union, will move -the rejection. ....-■ It is generally anticipated that Mr. . Chamberlain is willing- to : compromise. It is reported in the City that he has announced his willingness to abandon the entire increase.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable 'Assn, .'•'.'•■ London, April 21. Mr. Chamberlain, in his Budget speech, stated that the expenditure-on tho Sup ply service amounted to '3,788,000,000, to which must be added partly to cover- the extra cost of unemployment and of the agreement with Australia mid • New Zealand in regard to Nnuru Island, but mainly to; provide for.further war bonuses and for publio services.—Reuter-. ME. CHAMBERLAIN REPLIES TO ~., .-: "CRITICISM. , (Re. April 22, 7.25 p.m.)' < ,- -London, April 21. ' In the House of Commons Mr. Chamberlain,' replying to the Budget criticisms, said he did not apprehend that the -, increase in the wine duties, would appreciably increase the difficulties of France,. Italy, and'-Portugal.. .The French proposal to drastically restrict ■ the importation of luxuries would affect British 'trade, but we had not complained because neither French nor British action was unfriendly or retaliatory. It was simply due to tho necessity of restricting expenditure and raising the revenue to meet obligations.- He emphasised the ■immense things the nation was doing in facing its responsibilities. He intended to stand by hi 9 original proposal to ic...crease the'excess profits duty, to 60 per cent, but would remit the increase; in the event of .-.war,, wealth taxation being introduced. He would be disappointed if-there was not a,further vast reduction in public expenditure during the current year.—lmperial Nows Swvice. ,