3
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 1980
SIR PHILIP ALSO COMMENTED ON SUGGESTIONS THAT PERSONAL ALLOWANCES SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCREASED TO $25 000 FOR A SINGLE PERSON TO $50 000 FOR A MARRIED MAN AND THAT THE CHILD ALLOWANCES SHOULD HAVE BEEN RAISED TO $8 000 FOR THE FIRST CHILD, $7 000 FOR THE SECOND CHILD AND $5 000 FOR THE THIRD CHILD.
THOSE WHO HAD ARGUED ALONG THESE LINES, HE SAID, SIMPLY DO NOT REALISE HOW EXPENSIVE THEIR IDEAS WOULD BE IT WOULD COST NO LESS THAN $1 380 MILLION IN 1980-81 (OR 76 PER CENT OF THE ESTIMATED YIELD FROM PERSONAL TAXATION BEFORE ALLOWING FOR ANY CONCESSIONS), COMPARED WITH THE COST OF HIS PACKAGE AT $426 MILLION (OR 24 PER CENT OF THE ESTIMATED YIELD FROM PERSONAL TAXATION BEFORE ALLOWING FOR THE CONCESSIONS).
REPLYING TO OTHER POINTS RAISED BY UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS IN THE DEBATE, SIR PHILIP SAID HE KNEW OF NO EVIDENCE THAT THE ABSENCE OF SEPARATE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM OR THE ABOLITION OF THE WORKING WIFE ALLOWANCE IN 1973, HAD LED TO WOMEN, SKILLED OR UNSKILLED, LEAVING THE LABOUR FORCE.
OF A TOTAL OF OVER 289 000 DEMAND NOTES FOR SALARIES TAX ISSUED IN 1979-80 ONLY ABOUT 56 000 INVOLVED WORKING WIVES AND, OF THESE. ABOUT 48 500 WOULD HAVE DERIVED SOME BENEFIT FROM A WORKING WIFE ALLOWANCE. THE REMAINING 7 500 WOULD NOT HAVE BENEFITED BECAUSE THEY WERE ALREADY ON THE STANDARD RATE OF TAX. IN PROPORTIONATE TERMS, THESE FIGURES ARE NOT MATERIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THOSE FOR 1972-73, THE LAST YEAR FOR WHICH A WORKING WIFE ALLOWANCE WAS GRANTED.
ON HIS NEW CHILD ALLOWANCES, SIR PHILIP SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE FISCAL SYSTEM ENCOURAGED PARENTS TO HAVE LARGE FAMILIES. HE NOTED THAT IN 1979-80, ALLOWANCES WERE GRANTED UNDER SALARIES TAX FOR A TOTAL OF 134 000 CHILDREN OF WHOM 67 900 WERE FIRST CHILDREN AND 41 600 SECOND CHILDREN WHILST ONLY 17 100 WERE GRANTED FOR A THIRD CHILD. THEREAFTER,
THEREAFTER, THE FIGURES DROP DRAMATICALLY AND, FOR SIX TO NINE CHILDREN, A TOTAL OF ONLY 456 ALLOWANCES WERE GRANTED AT A COST TO THE REVENUE OF SOME $120 000 ONLY.
REFERRING TO REMARKS ON THE AGE CRITERION FOR DEPENDENT PARENT ALLOWANCE, SIR PHILIP SAID IT MIGHT WELL BE THAT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR, AND IN SOME COMMERCIAL ORGANISATIONS, 55 IS THE OFFICIAL RETIREMENT AGE, BUT INCREASINGLY, STAFF, BOTH IN THE PUBLIC AND THE PRIVATE SECTORS CONTINUE WITH THEIR EMPLOYERS FOR MUCH LONGER.
+AND THOSE WHO DO RETIRE OFTEN DO SO IN ORDER TO TAKE UP OTHER EMPLOYMENT. I BELIEVE THAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE CONTINUE
IN EMPLOYMENT WELL BEYOND THE AGE OF 55 AND IT IS AS WELL THAT THEY DO BECAUSE HONG KONG NEEDS THEIR EXPERIENCE.+
THUS HE BELIEVED THAT THE AGE CRITERION SET AT 60 OR BELOW 60 WHERE THE PARENT IS ELIGIBLE FOR A DISABILITY ALLOWANCE REFLECTS MORE ACCURATELY THE AGE AT WHICH PEOPLE RETIRE IN HONG KONG.
14