Vol. 236 No. 11
andMr. P. O'Donnell asked the Minister for Local Government if he is aware that carriers of milk using a tractor or cut-away lorry with trailer attached are being compelled to pay the rate of road tax applicable to a truck on foot of a recent court decision; and if he is prepared to introduce legislation to have this position rectified.
33.
asked the Minister for Local Government whether he is aware that farmers, who were allowed to import secondhand landrovers and tax them at £2 10s, the agricultural rate for a tractor, have now been informed that the classification of these vehicles is changed and have been asked to pay £34 plus £14 for a trailer, when such is used; and whether he will amend the classification at least in respect of those vehicles already imported.
I propose, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 32 and 33 together.
The special rate of tax of £2-10-0 per annum for agricultural tractors was intended to apply only to a tractor-trailer combination. It was applied to vehicles such as lorries and landrovers which had their bodies cut-away and could, therefore, be regarded as "tractors", but was never intended to apply to cut-away vehicles in effect reconstituted as lorries by having substantial trailers superimposed on them.
Doubts had arisen as to the eligibility for the special rate of £2-10-0 of the normal land tractor hauling a two-wheeled trailer which could be regarded as superimposed, and accordingly section 44 of the Finance Act, 1968, confirmed that such a vehicle was entitled to be taxed at the £2-10-0 rate. This provision drew attention to the fact that certain other combinations, such as a cut-away lorry with a superimposed trailer, were not entitled to this concession and, where such combinations were in fact being used illegally under the £2-10-0 rate of tax, the owners' attention has been drawn to the fact. I do not propose to amend the law on the subject.
I understand that the court case referred to is the subject of an appeal and I do not, therefore, propose to comment on it.
Is the Minister aware that in every county there are many people, mostly small farmers, drawing milk and they have been paying the £2 or £2-10-0 and are now being called upon to pay, in some cases, over £100? Surely the Minister will admit that that is unfair and unjust?
They have been doing it illegally.
Is the Minister aware that these landrovers and trailers were imported in good faith and that the £2-10-0 tax was, in fact, accepted for them? These people who brought in the landrovers and trailers in good faith and paid tax in good faith have now been notified that hereafter they must pay, in my case, £48. Could the Minister not consider at least providing that if this was a misapprehension, vehicles imported prior to, say, the 1st of this month will not be liable to the tax but that thereafter such imports will be?
My understanding is that if the trailer is not superimposed on the vehicle the £2 10s tax applies. In any case, I do not propose to do anything until this appeal has been disposed of.
Is it the position, then, that the matter is still in some measure sub judice and, if so, is it expedient, if the matter has not yet been finally determined, to be levying the tax generally? If it is still sub judice, would it not be well to suspend the general levy until the matter is finally determined?
This £2 10s tax was never intended to apply in cases such as this and if it has been utilised in that fashion it was done illegally.
If it was done illegally, would the Minister tell me why the taxation officers allowed this to happen in every county in the past year?
The fact that an illegal practice has been carried on does not necessarily mean that the illegal practice should now be legalised.
Could I ask the Minister: surely, if, through some misapprehension, what the Minister describes as an illegal practice has been allowed to continue and as a result of this action on the part of the taxing authority neighbours have been induced to bring in the cut-down landrover and trailer believing that they are entitled to pay £2 10s, as their neighbour has done, there is a very strong case for saying that such vehicles as were imported while the misapprehension existed on the part of the taxing authority will be allowed to continue at that tax level but that future imports will come under the revised tax level? It is a great hardship on a man who has spent £500 or £600 on bringing in this combination to find that his property is unusable and virtually unsaleable.
It can be used if the trailer is not superimposed on it.
Is the Minister aware that the importation of these lorries has been stopped now, anyway? All you are doing is crucifying relatively a very few people.
Am I to believe that if the tractor is drawing a four-wheel trailer the owner will be responsible for the £34 tax?
No; if it is what is ordinarily recognised as an agricultural tractor, the £2 10s rate applies.
Irrespective of the number of wheels?
Irrespective of the number of wheels?
Yes.
I was told differently in the Minister's Department. I was told that if a two-wheeled trailer is superimposed on a tractor, there is still——
Section 44 of the Finance Act, 1968, confirmed that a normal land tractor hauling a two-wheel trailer which could be regarded as superimposed was entitled to be taxed at the £2 10s rate.
When you talk about its being superimposed, do you mean an articulated vehicle?
Yes—in fact, the lorry has been re-converted to a lorry.
