Finance Bill, 1934—From the Seanad.

The Dáil went into Committee to consider recommendations made by the Seanad to the Finance Bill.

I propose to ask the Committee to disagree with all the recommendations, except recommendation No. 4.

Recommendation No. 1.—Section 2, sub-section (2). To delete in line 4 the word "five" and to substitute therefor the word "ten."

I move: That the Committee disagree with the Seanad in recommendation No. 1. The proposal in the recommendation is that the exemption limit should be raised from £5 to £10, and I am asking the House to disagree with that.

I think that the Minister should have given some reasons to the Committee for asking it to disagree with the recommendations from the Seanad. A house with a £5 valuation is a very small one. As well as I remember, the valuation of a three-roomed house is about £7—a house that would be somewhat on the lines of a labourer's cottage. I do not know that you could get a house built now that would have as low a valuation as £5. In the City of Dublin an allowance is made in respect of houses with a valuation under £8. If the rates are paid by a certain date such premises are only liable to two-thirds of the assessment in respect of municipal rates. I suppose that if the Minister has made up his mind about this there is no more to be said on it. As the Bill stands the allowance made is so small that it is hardly likely to be availed of by anybody.

I do not think it is necessary to detain the House discussing this matter at any length. The fact is that the proposal as it stands in the Bill and as passed by the Dáil represents a concession which was made following representations which were made to me that undue hardship might be occasioned in the cases of certain small cottage properties which were let at uneconomic rents. Accordingly, as I have already said, I brought in the concession which is embodied in the Bill as passed by the Dáil. The question of what the limiting amount of that concession should be was discussed here at length. I do not think it is desirable to occupy the time of the House on a day on which there is so much important business to engage its attention by prolonging the debate on this matter.

Question put and declared carried.

I move: That the Committee disagree with the Seanad in recommendations 2 and 3. The recommendation was to insert the word "management" after the word "maintenance." For administrative reasons, I do not consider that it is desirable that the word "management" should be inserted.

Recommendation No. 2.—Section 2, sub-section (2). After the word "maintenance", in line 6, to insert the word "management."

Recommendation No. 3.—Section 2, sub-section (2). After the word "maintenance", in line 12, to insert the word "management."

Question put and agreed to.
Recommendation No. 4.—Section 2, sub-section (2). To delete in line 16 the words "in their opinion."

I move: That the Committee agree with the Seanad in recommendation No. 4.

Recommendation No. 4 agreed to.
Recommendation No. 5.—New section. Before Section 7 to insert a new section as follows:—
7. Assessments for income tax arising out of income derived from fees paid for the service of stallions, bulls, boars, or breeding stock of any kind kept on a farm for stud or breeding purposes shall be treated as income coming within the terms of Schedule B of the Income Tax Act, 1918, unless the owner of such stallions, bulls, boars or other breeding stock shall claim to be assessed under Schedule D of the said Act.

I move: That the Committee disagree with the Seanad in recommendation No. 5. This recommendation covers a matter which was debated at great length in the Dáil, and in relation to which the House has already decided, that the exemption asked for here should not be granted.

This matter was not debated at any great length in the House. It was the subject of consideration for about an hour. My information is that since it was last discussed here one more fashionable stallion, as these animals are described, has left the country. The position that we are in now is this: that, presumably, three-fourths of the higher priced stallions have left Ireland, and that there are not more than two animals now standing in this country at a fee of over £150. When we last discussed this I understood that the matter was to receive the consideration of the Ministry. If it be thought that an increase of the bounties, or the withdrawal of the restrictions on the operation of a percentage of the bounties, meets the case I want to say that it does not. The position at the moment is that this country will probably lose, if it has not already lost, its character as a high-class bloodstock breeding country. If the Ministry are satisfied on that, then there is nothing more to be said about it.

Question put and declared carried.
Disagreement reported to recommendations 1, 2, 3 and 5 from the Seanad, and agreement to No. 4.