NOT INDEFINITE

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 99, 28 April 1937, Page 12

NOT INDEFINITE

COST OF DEFENCE

CHANCELLOR. EXPLAINS

PROFITS TAX DEBATF

FIXING OF STANDARDS

(British Official Wireless.),. (Received April 28, 1.45 p.m.)'

RUGBY, April' 27.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Neville Chamberlain) spoke in the House of Commons tonight on the Budget resolution relating to the proposed national defence contribution. He scouted the claim of tha Opposition that the proposal was the main cause of the falls of industrials and other' ordinary shares on tha London Stock Exchange, and reminded the House that..-.•.the., ;Gon« tinental Bourses were likewise disturbed where no sutilr proposal was in question, but he admitted that uncertainty regarding the new tax.was an element in the London markets' depressed condition. , v -; ■■ He repeated his. explanation of th'a vagueness of the scheme .that , tha necessity of Budget secrecy had-pre* vented his obtaining the / advice h« desired before completing the details. Mr. Chamberlain expressed surpris* at the extent of the danger which it had been suggested would be done by what he regarded as a mild and moderate proposal, ' and, claiming that the Treasury was in,a. reasonably; good position to estimate -the-effects of: the proposed taxation, ■ said .it waa not expecting a higher.yield than between £20,000,000 and £25,000,000 in the financial year 1937-38. Surely that was not an intolerable. burden on industry. V ■ ' . .' ■~ . EFFECT ON INDUSTRY. In reference to the anticipated'effects oi the defence expenditure on.the ex. pansion of industry,. Mr. Chamberlain said that exceptional expenditura would have to end.. It was not unlimited.. . ~..:. "If one is to talk seriously: about this matter," he said, "we are not seeking to dominate the world. We are seeking only to, make ourselves and out Empire communications safe. Therefore I feel justified in saying that .wa are not faced here with an unlimited or indefinite amount of expenditure. There is a limit to it, and there is therefore a limit to the amount we hava got to raise." , The Chancellor reviewed some .of the errors which, had been made.in the Press. He was obtaining the information he required before he could, state how the difficulties' which had .been urged, would be. met.. He-was, receiving the comments .of the financial and industrial worlds, and-he would study all this data in, a most, sympathetic manner. , , . .: " . ■ ■ ..■■ basis;of'iiEvi.,'.. .'•.;■■■;.:...■■ In the meantime he would go .somewhat -further into, two .points.', The first - related-to the years of the; profit standard, which; in, the 'Budgetistatement, were 1933, 1934, and■, 1935.: The Chancellor said he.was prepared-to reconsider that either by way of-some choice, given to taxpayers to ■ choose between the different years, or by adding the other, years, or a combination of both, but he would .not commit himself at this, stage. '■. ' . . :

The second point related to the al« ternative capital- standard and.-to. suggested, rates of "profit on. that basis to which tax would be adjusted.