INCOME TAX REFORM
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
SIR ,—It seems likely that a recent legal decision will revive the project for assessing Income Tax upon the basis of the previous year's income. This change was recommended by the Royal Commission and the Government presented a Bill which was eventually dropped in consequence of an outcry against some proposed administrative reforms also included in the Bill. I refer especially to the proposed abolition of assessment by the Local Commissioners. I wish to support that proposal. Its advantages were clearly explained by the Royal Commis- sion, who were unanimous on the subject and were fully illus- trated in the evidence. But few read the Reports of Royal Commissions and fewer read the evidence. There have been suggestions that the change would remove safeguards to the taxpayers and transfer power from, persons elected by the taxpayers to the bnreaucracy. The Local Commissioners are not elected by the taxpayers. But let that pass. They are not officials.
, A is more important to point out that Inspectors of Taxes
already have power to bring incomes on to the assessment roll, though with some circumlocution and delay, for which in the end the public has to pay ; that in the vast majority of cases the assessments are in fact prepared by the Inspectors and that the " making " or " allowing " of the assessments by the Local Commissioners is a sham and a make-believe, which is only a cause of delay, annoyance and expense. It cannot be otherwise. Assessment is always going on. Questions have to be asked and answered. Decisions cannot wait for the infrequent meetings of the Local Commissioners. No one has proposed to abolish the appeals to the local Commissioners. Some taxpayers like these local tribunals. Others, who do not, can go to the Special Commissioners in London. Let the safeguard of local appeals be preserved, but let net the public be misled into supposing that assessment by Local Commissioners is of any value to the taxpayer.—
Previous page
