CO129-482 - Public Offices - 1923 — Page 436

1

434

in his memorandum drawn up for H.H. Kinister in July 1919 held that the only case in which there is or can be any

actual exempt ion is that of persons domiciled in Hongkong and holding shares in China companies and that the fee was intended to represent no more and no less than a composition

for Transfer fees only, the loss of reveme to the Hongkong

Gover ment on this account could hardly, if this view is

correct, be large.

On the other hand, although H.E. the Governor makes no

reference to it, section 35 of the Ordinance of 1911 which

is a re-enactment of the Companies (Local Register) Ordinance of 1907) as amended by section 7(c) of the Ordinence of 1921,

in providing for the levy of a Local Register Licence fee also at the rate of 4 cents per $100 of paid-up capital is

very clear on the subject of exemption from both transfer and

probate duties Many companies which have since come on

the Shanghai register were paying this fee prior to 1916,

and section 7 (5) of the Ordinance of 1915 makes it clear

that the present 4 cents fee is intended, inter alia, to

replace this local register licence fee. This would appear

to constitute the Hongkong Goverment's best claim to the

fee as at present levied, and it is difficult to understand

why it has never been referred to.

As regards Transfer fees, there is nothing to show that

the Hongkong Government has ever attempted to estimate

the amount of its loss in this respect owing to the exemption

of China companies, but a reference to the Stamp Ordinance of

1921 shows that the fee on transfer of shares is 20 cents

per $100 or part thereof of the market value of chares.

this basis,

the 4 cents fee corresponds to an annual transfer

of 20% of the shares of a company which is certainly

On

die proportionate/

: