I move the Second Reading of this Bill. Its purpose is to put beyond doubt the legal validity of the procedure which we have followed heretofore. Deputies may be aware that the procedure we have followed was the procedure for a very long time in Great Britain, and no difficulties arose until 1913. In 1913, Mr. Gibson Bowles challenged the collection of income tax before the passage of the Finance Act, and he was upheld in the courts there. As a result of the judgement that was given, a Provisional Collection of Taxes Act was passed in Great Britain, and the only matter that was argued before the courts was income tax. In regard to customs duties, there were certain passages in legislation which left it much in doubt as to whether the court would have given the same judgement in regard to customs duties as it did in regard to income tax. As a matter of fact, afterwards, in 1915, the new import duties were imposed by resolution of the House of Commons and were collected before the passage of the Finance Act. There is no doubt that while the court might have given a different decision in a customs case from the decision it gave in the income tax case, on the other hand it might have given the same decision; and the position in England appears to be now that it is not thought safe to collect customs duties before the passage of the Finance Act. In recent years, for instance, when the McKenna duties were reimposed they were not collected until the Finance Act was passed. Apparently there was a doubt as to whether an action in the courts might not produce a decision that the collection was illegal. We have certain other difficulties. A difficulty arose in this way, that under the existing Provisional Collection of Taxes Act we might renew an existing duty by resolution and collect, or we might renew it with modifications, or we might modify the existing duty and, for instance, increase and quadruple it and collect, but we cannot, under the existing Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, collect a new duty or abolish a duty. In so far as we have done that heretofore, we have been relying on certain odd provisions in the Customs Act of 1876, and we are advised that it is doubtful whether a challenge to our collection might not be successful. As I have said, from the procedure that has been adopted the opinion appears to prevail in England that such a challenge would be successful. We desire, therefore, to give legal sanction that cannot be doubted to the procedure that has been followed heretofore. There is another difficulty even with regard to taxes that are covered by the existing Provisional Collection of Taxes Act. There is a provision as to using the powers given in that particular Act only once in a session. In Great Britain, they have sessions that do not run for several years, as ours do.
For instance, it is quite probable that last year if anybody had challenged the collection of income tax, after the expiration of the previous period and before the Finance Act had been passed, they might have successfully done so. It seems to me the procedure provided in the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act is one that cannot be subject to any serious criticism. It continued the procedure that always existed in England up to 1913. Deputies, I think, are familiar with it. What happens is that Budget Resolutions are introduced in Committee on Finance. After they are passed by the House they given authority for the collection of tax on whatever basis may be embodied in the resolution. Within the next ten sitting days of the Dáil, after the passage of that resolution in Committee, the Dáil must adopt the resolution with or without amendment. If the Dáil does not adopt the resolution in that way within ten sitting days the power to collect the tax lapses. Within twenty sitting days after the passage of the confirming resolution in the Dáil the Second Stage of a Bill embodying the resolution must be passed by the Dáil, and if not so passed within twenty sitting days, then the power to collect lapses. Finally, legislation enacting the provisions of the original Budget Resolution, with or without amendment, must be passed within four months of the introduction of the resolution or the power to collect lapses. If any money is collected under the resolution which would not be collectable under the Bill by reason of an amendment having been adopted, repayment must be made. For instance, if we had in our resolutions fixed the apparel duty at 20 per cent. and if afterwards the House reduced the duty to 15 per cent., anyone who might have paid the 20 per cent. under the resolution would be entitled to a refund, as being only liable to the 15 per cent. It seems to me that it is absolutely necessary to put our legal powers beyond doubt in case we were successfully challenged in regard to any tax which was being collected.
