CO129-615-2 Income tax 10-3-1947 - 6-2-1948 — Page 70

152

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

the I. & E. Department would be necessary and the imposition of a Customs Tariff, even on a limited range of goods, would give rise to a mass of restrictions and complications which would lead to constant irritation and delay. This would inevitably have a very harmful effect on the entrepôt trade of Hong Kong, and I can hardly imagine that any such scheme would be welcomed by the business community.

In a rather different class is the state lottery proposal which has been advanced by the Hon. Dr. S. N. Chau, and also mentioned by the Hon. Mr. Watson. There are of course many arguments against the institution of such lotteries, both on moral and other grounds, but I agree that the suggestion merits further consideration. I would point out however that this is really quite outside the present dis- cussion. It is hardly appropriate that a Government should depend upon a lottery as one of its major sources of revenue. My own view, and one which I gather is shared at least by the Hon. Mr. Watson, is that the role of a lottery, if it were decided to introduce one, would rather be to supplement normal revenue in order to raise funds for a specific purpose. In practice, therefore, it might be desirable to credit any funds raised by such means to some special account. In point of fact the best use of a lottery is probably as a means of financing some desirable development project of a non-productive character.

Before passing on to other matters, I should just like to say a word or two about a point raised by the Hon. Mr. Leo D'Almada e Castro. He took exception to the allowance given in respect of children after the fourth. These allowances may look low, or may even look niggardly when considered by themselves, but they must be considered in relation to the scale of personal allowances as a whole. The allowance for which a family of father, mother and five children will qualify amounts to $18,200, and I hardly think that that can reasonably be regarded as ungenerous.

I should like to take this opportunity of informing Honourable Members that a final examination of this Bill has disclosed a few points which will necessitate amendment, and it is proposed that these should be moved in the course of the committee stage. With two exceptions they are of a very minor character and are merely the results of a tidying-up process. For example, in some sections of the Bill a company is referred to as a corporation and in others as a company. We propose to standardize on corporation.'

Then there is an amendment designed to prevent a non-resident possessing a few Hong Kong shares from recovering the tax deducted by claiming the full personal allowances which of course would be quite unjustifiable, and finally there is one designed to promote equity as far as possible in the valuation for purposes of tax of accommodation either free or at a reduced rental provided by an employer either in a hotel or in a house or flat. I shall explain these two amendments in detail during the committee stage.

69

Page 70Page 71