PROTEST AGAINST DOUBLE INCOME TAX.

Evening Star, Issue 16050, 29 February 1916, Page 8

PROTEST AGAINST DOUBLE INCOME TAX.

(Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright,; . ~, T , • LONDON, February 28. Under the auspices of the London Chamber of Commerce and* an association Burned to protest against the duplication of the Income Tax within the Empire, a meeting was held at Cannon Street Hotel. The hall was crowded' by, 800 persons, -including representatives of the colonial banks, mercantile and financial houses, and private people, manv ladies attending. Lord SoutnAvark presided, Mr Annan Bryce, ‘moved-- That in the interest of the trade, commerce, and umty of the Empire it is essential that steps be taken by the Imperial Government to ensure that relief be Aveu from the imposition of a double income tax within the Empire.” He said it waessential in these times that all ties of Empire he drawn as close as possible." The double tgx might have the must serious effect in preventing this. If the heads of offices and firms wore to leave the United Kingdom the tendency would be to get plant somewhere else, though he did not think Australian companies would do this.. He was sure the Government would yield if sufficient pressure were brought to bear on them.—Air Wise, supporting the motion, referred especially to the hardships of a largo number of subscribers to the Australian loans, lie referred ( 0 the great'injustice of the -Vet of 1914 in charging Income Tax on money which never came here. Tiffs was especially unjust to visitors here. They were laxed oa money loft in Australia to develop that country’s industries. There must be* a recognition of tho fiscal unity of the Eihpire. We did not want to shirk 011° fiscal responsibilities, but we must be on an equality with the rest of the Empire He alluded to the £40,000,000 raised in Australia for the war, and said fft was sate to say that another £40,000,000 would be raised.—Mr Yeuim, in supporting the motion, repeated tho arguments which he put forward in his recent paper on the subject, and emphasised the fact that Britain taxed a resident s income wherever it, was made, whereas the Dominions only taxed incomes made there. Australia, was acting wisely in conserving financial control of companies. Australia was not driving them abroad. The double Income Tax would not have any result other than to divert "money from the Dominions. That was a most‘serious stale of thines firm r.n Empice viewpoint. There was a necessity to build no the Empire and make it self-supporting, and it was only possible to do tiffs by keeping tho monev in the Empire. He referred to the thousand people who had come to Britain simply because they had sent their sous lo the front. It was a cruel injustice that they should pay double Income Tax because of their patriotism. —The motion was carried unanimously, and it was resolved to ask Mr. McKenna and Mr Hughes to receive a .deputation, on the matter,.