INCOME TAX

Southland Times, Issue 21073, 3 May 1930, Page 7

INCOME TAX

INCREASE IN BRITAIN

OPPOSITION AMENDMENT REJECTED

MR SNOWDEN AND CRITICS (United Press Assn.—By Telegraph-Copyright.) (Rec. 7.30 p.m.) London, May 1. In the House of Commons during the Budget debate Sir G. Rentoul (Conservative) moved to reject the proposed increase in the standard rate of income tax. Mr I. J. Albery (Conservative), seconding, said that increased taxation was driving capital abroad. Mr R. J. G. Boothby (Conservative), said that the gilt-edged market had practically collapsed since the Budget. Mr Snowden said he had received many expressions of approval of the Budget, even from the super-tax payers. The previous Government was responsible for most of the items of increased expenditure. The Tories’ policy was what was called broadening the basis of taxation; in other words, relieving the rich and overburdening the poor. The revenue from Customs excise amounted to £250,000,000 yearly, fourfifths of which came from non-income tax payers. Though America and Germany were reducing taxation, they had 6,000,000 and 3,000,000 unemployed respectively. The whiskered argument about capital being driven abroad was fallacious. Neither had the high income super-tax ' had this effect. Despite the Budget’s alleged disastrous effects on the national credit, the bank rate to-day was further reduced, which every financier would admit was partly due to his method of dealing with the debt. Mr Churchill said that Mr Snowden had revealed a spirit of class warfare, aiming not at an immediate but a steady trafikference of wealth till capitalists were entirely eliminated. It was no wonder that trade recovery was slower and more painful in Britain than in any other country since the war. More than half the increased income tax was due to increased doles to those unemployed, who were not even asked to say whether they were genuinely seeking work. • The amendment was rejected by 255 votes to 139.