80
1
annual returns of "Actual Revenue of the Colony on which the Military Contribution is payable", do continue to make the exemptions at (a) and (b); the tax on petroleum has since been restored to the gross revenue.
24.
Hong Kong might adduce the present practice of the Straits referred to in the preceding paragraph as a precedent for their present contentions in three ways:-
( B )
(b)
(c)
In support of their full claim for the exemption
of "municipal" revenue.
The answer to this has been given in paragraph 21. The difference between the methods of raising revenue at the Straits Settlements and at Hong Kong was known in 1895 and was taken into consideration in the Haliburton settlement and has been fully accepted by the Colonial office.
In support of their claim for total exemption of
rents of government buildings let for profit or of any amended claim for assessment on net receipts (which is the present practice of the Straits).
The answer to this would be that not even the Colonial Office support this practice and it might be necessary to consider its abandonment by the Straits. In this connection it might be observed that in July, 1921, Hong Kong drew attention to the example of the' straits Settlements as regards the inclusion of the proceeds, from Government buildings let for profit, in the assessable revenue on the basis of net receipts and asked that they might be treated in the same way; the War office agreed that the Straits Settlements were doing this, but stated that they did not approve and had consistently challenged the Straits' right to do so. Hong Kong's proposal was therefore rejected and the Colonial office informed them accordingly.
In support of a modified claim for the exemption of
hospital and education revenues as such.
It may not now be possible to insist on restoring the assessment of these revenues at the Straits, and Hong Kong might demand a similar concession. It would not necessarily follow, however, that because the Haliburton principles have been departed from in the Straits Settlements as regards these items, under protest from the War office and the Treasury, the same concession is to be deliberately allowed to Hong Kong. The loss in military contribution would be between £4,000 and £5,000 a year.
FINANCIAL COMPARISON.
25.
The War office are not prepared to regard Hong Kong's reserved claims as an inducement to accept the Colony's main proposal for a revision of the method of assessment as shewn above (paras.15 - 244. information before them, the War Office have good grounds for rejecting all the more substantial of these reserved claims, so that the real question lies therefore in the issue
between
On the
(a) the present (Haliburton) assessment, viz:
the cost of the garrison
17
or