CO129-615-2 Income tax 10-3-1947 - 6-2-1948 — Page 86

85

examination than had hitherto been possible and that it

should be referred to a Committee for further examination.

The three members who abstained from expressing any opinion

in regard to the standard rate did so because they felt that

if they associated themselves with any figure, it might be

regarded as equivalent to giving some modified measure of

support to the Bill. This they were anxious to avoid.

4.

The Committee's view that the introduction of the

tax should be postponed for at least one year commanded

widespread public support.

It was known that the enactment

of a similar measure in Singapore and Malaya had been deferred

and it was argued that, if these colonies had been given this

breathing space in order that business firms might have a

longer period in which to recover from their war losses and

in order that private individuals might not be called upon

to pay the tax until conditions had become more normal, it

was only reasonable that a similar concession should be given

in Hong Kong. I did not feel able to accept this recommenda-

tion of the Committee and decided that the Bill must be

proceeded with.

5.

I considered that, in view of the very strong

opposition to the measure from all sections of the community

which had taken the form both of a press campaign and the

presentation of a number of petitions, it would be desirable,

if possible, to accept the Committee's recommendations on the

other two points, namely, the standard rate of tax and the

question of examination of the Bill by a further Committee.

I was naturally reluctant to force the Bill through with the

official majority in the face of a unanimous unofficial vote

and there were indications that the opposition of some

Unofficial Members, and indeed of a large section of the

public, was not directed against the Bill as a whole but

arose from the fear that it would be forced through with a

high standard rate.