Before we pass this Bill I would like to make a few observations. I want for my own information, for the information of the House, and for the information of the public who are interested in the matter, to know what is going to happen in connection with the collection of income tax this year. It will be in the recollection of those who did me the honour to listen to me the other day that I drew attention to certain peculiar hardships in the collection of income tax which seemed likely to arise in this particular year. I raised two distinct points with only one of which the Minister dealt yesterday. I want to be quite clear about what is going to happen. I want the Minister to correct me if I am wrong. As I understand, the point arises in respect of assessments of British and foreign investments. I understand I was right in assuming that under the provisions of Section 11 of the Act of 1929 the assessment will be made on the basis of the preceding year. I am now dealing with my first point which arose where investments were transferred from British to Saorstát Eireann securities. In that case, as I understood from what the Minister said yesterday, the assessment will still be made on the basis of the preceding year, and relief will subsequently be given as a matter of course, and as a matter of right, on application to the Revenue Commissioners.
If that is so, I have nothing further to say about it, but I want to appeal to him to consider the other point to which he did not refer. It has nothing to do with the exchange of investments, but has to do with the falling off of the proceeds of British or foreign investments this year, as compared with the preceding year. Let us take an example. Assuming that a man last year received £100 from British investments and that this year these same investments only bring in £30. That is not an exaggerated proportion when we remember that many companies have either passed their dividends altogether or reduced them, and many have not even been able to pay anything on their preference capital. Obviously that is likely to create very considerable hardship. Had this occurred last year there would have been a certain measure of relief because, under Section 4 of the Finance Act of last year, where such income was less by more than 20 per cent. than it was in the preceding year, certain reliefs were available. That provision is not found either in the present Finance Bill or in the earlier Finance Bill of this year. Consequently whether people are aware of it or not, the inspectors will have no option but to assess the taxpayer in the case I have taken on 70 per cent. more than he actually received. I know the answer is that if it had gone the other way, and that if a taxpayer in a particular year got £100 where he previously got £30, he would be assessed on £30. Therefore he must take the rough with the smooth, taking one year with another, what he lost in the roundabouts he would gain on the swings. In normal times that would be a perfectly fair answer and I would have no quarrel with it. In a general way the change that was made in 1909 was for the general convenience and advantage of everyone concerned. I impress upon the Minister in the peculiar circumstances of this year, and in view of the notorious fact that people's incomes are seriously affected by the general trade slump which has taken place, that he might take an opportunity of re-introducing the mitigating clause which was contained in the Act of last year, so that some measure of relief will be available for people whose incomes this year are being very seriously affected.
