Fire Offices Committee.
324
340
11. Queen Street Choupside. —vadou ? Ē.C.
its confirmation.
188
Your Lordship will doubtless remember
that the Duty which was formally chargeable in this Country on Fore Insurance Policies was abolished
on the ground that
many years ago, principally
it is inequitable to tax prudent persons who protect themselves by means of Insurance against losses by fire to the relief protauto of the imprudent who neglect to take similar precautions.
go
เ
The principal argument which was urged by the introducer in support of the Hong Kong Ordinance was that when the bhinese local bompauito
to transact business elsewhere they are themselves heavily taxed, and he cited the cases of Bombay. balcutta, and Madras. But he himself admitte a that the cases were not analogous because in the places referred to the taxes are levied not, as is proposed at Hong Kong, on Foreign Companies only, but whon Local Companies also. Moreover, if the argument is based upon the ground of reciprocity then it altogether fails in its application to the case of English and China bompanies because the Chnia bompanies may, and do, transact both Fire and Marine Insurance business here without any special tax being demanded of them.
It is further to be remembered that the position of the Local Companies is such that they do not stand in need of any
special protection. They are
already able to compete on more than equal termes with Foreign Companies, because a large number of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.