THE BUDGET.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SFECTATOR."J SIB,—As I generally agree with the views you express on political subjects, it is with much regret that I have observed the line you have adopted with regard to the Budget, especially as it seems to me that you have entirely failed to grasp the point of view of the Opposition. Admitting that it is reason- able to assimilate the duties on realty and personalty, and that there is no objection to a sound principle of graduation, surely the Opposition are right in opposing such an absurd system of graduation and aggregation as that proposed, the effect of which is to impose a heavy tax on a person receiving a small benefit, because he derives it from a rich man, and even from one not leaving a large estate, if he happened to be possessed of a substantial life interest ?
Almost all of the amendments moved have had the object of removing the anomalies arising from the two false prin- ciples of taxing a legatee, not according to what he receives, but according to the amount left by the testator, and of including that in the testator's estate which forms no part of it, for the purpose of increasing the rate of taxation. It is true that in your article you fasten on to one amendment which opposed graduation altogether, but this received a very limited support from the Opposition, and indeed, the most thoroughgoing advocate of graduation might well hesitate as to how to vote when the amendment, though in form opposed to graduation generally, practically applied to the ridiculous scheme proposed. Further, assuming the proposed basis of graduation and aggregation, the Bill is so drawn as to produce such extraordinary injustices, that every line and word of it requires the most careful scrutiny in order to avoid imposing duties to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has probably never given a thought.
It would take up too much of your space to specify these multitudinous cases, but as samples of them I may refer to the case of an insurance office having to pay duty on the termination of an annuity granted by itself, and to the case of an estate insolvent in consequence of large liabilities on guarantee, having to pay duty on the gross amount of the estate without any deduction for liabilities of that character. It is probable that these and numerous similar absurdities do not arise from any error of the draftsman, but from the Inland Revenue authorities in- structing him to include every possible interest without troubling to think whether their instructions did not extend to cases in which taxation is obviously unjust. It is indeed true that from the purely party point of view, the Opposition may be acting unwisely, as the subject is one which only a minute portion of the electorate can be expected to under- stand; but it appears to me that they are entitled to the very highest credit for so gallantly struggling to prevent these great injustices in a matter on which they cannot hope to derive any party benefits.—I am, Sir, &c., A CITY SOLICITOR.
Previous page
