The Finance Bill

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 49, 15 July 1914, Page 5

The Finance Bill

THE TAX o.Y COLONIAL INCOMES.

SHOULD PRODUCE A MILLION.

By Cable.—Pre.-* Association.—Copyri«rii Received 14, IO.'O pjji. T ~ TT London, Julv 14. *l. 5.- OUBe °f Commons, speaking on the Finance Bill debate, Mr. WorthMgton Evans said that Mr. Llovd George expected to realise a million from those escaping payment of income-tax owing ™l, ® arrangements under which the/ left their incomes arising from investments abroad to be re-invested abroad. His amendment exempted money invested in the colonies, of which the "proceeds were allowed to remain abroad tor the benefit of the colonies. The amendment did not effect colonial loans, because the dividends were sent to Great Britain. The clause as drawn up would not tax tne rich man. Mr. Evans detailed several methods of possible evasion, includ«ng the formation of small limited liability companies which would not declare ■dividends. Mr. Llovd George's clause, however, would seriously affect a large class of colonial financiers on their return to the Motherland. There were «nany planters, fanners and ranchers returning to Britain who made large incomes on relatively small capital, but ■sed the great proportion of their incomes for extension of their business in the dominions and colonies, vet they were taxed as if they were entitled to (pend the whole of their incomes in Britain. The dominions were already levying income-tax upon those incomes which Mr. Llovd George intended to plunder. Received 14, 11.10 p.m.

London, July 1-1. Mr. Evans contended that it was highly desirable that individuals should he encouraged to invest in estates within the Empire. Mr. Cassell urged the exemption of the British Empire, quoting a precedent in -the Finance Act of 1849.

Other speakers emphasised the liardships of insurance companies. Mr. A. Williamson said Mr. Lloyd *Ceorge ran a risk of striking a good many people who were conducting legitimate business who had left their money •broad for the purpose of carrying on business. Mr. Holteno declared that the essential nature of the proposal was to tax property in the jurisdiction of another Government. That was a delicate pro■ceeding, and he was afraid it would cause considerable ill-will in the colonies.

Mr. Prettyman said the clause was ▼try complicated. It might involve Britain in serious complications with the colonies. The foreigner escaped the -double tax, but the colonial only escaped "while still resident in the colonies. Sir J. A. Simon held that if it could ke done with reasonable effectiveness there was no sort of income which more "•brionsly ought to be taxed than income from investments abroad which were kept abroad because the owners dijl not need to spend them in Britain. lie added that the Govcrmcnt propo-ed to valce it clear that as it was now poing to tax foreign incomes from year to Tear, though unremitted. the ta\ea<'.r would not a'-o be liable to be taxe.l again when tin accumulations were e•nittrd. The clause wa» an experiment, but the Government denied that the clause was de\ iscd in order to favor foreigners. nor would the insurance companies Buffer.

After a <livi ion on Mr. Evans'amendment, Mr. T.loyd George moved an amendment providing that companies and persons who have been rolling u;> Income abroad in past years should start with a clean sheet.

Several members o' both parties said the clause was absurd and badly drawn. ' The debate was automaticrillT closured. and tl|e amendment was carried t v 27ft to 190. Clauses six. fevfß and eight « -re closured, and were aot i;»-d.

IXOMF TAX P.ILI

London. .Tulv 13.

Tn the Finapcr Hill, clan.-" 5, Mr Worthington Kvaris* amendment, to exempt from livrnic lax <,>)onial rnvistments rein\'-ted in the '-o'-mies. ■was defeated by 20S t» 107.