568552-1929-Supplementary-Draft-Bill---Stamp-Amendment — Page 4

1021

4. Section 4 of this Ordinance introduces into section 5 (1) of the principal Ordinance certain words taken from section 1 of the Stamp Act, 1891, 54 & 55 Viet. e. 39, which are desirable for greater accuracy. An example of an exemption not found in the Stamp Ordinance itself is an indenture of apprenticeship to the sea service, which is exempted by section 108 (1) of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894.

5. Section 5 of this Ordinance adds two classes to the persons who are exempt from the obligation to take out annual certificates to practise. The two classes are (1) Professors of the Medical Faculty of the University of Hong Kong, and (2) any persons exempted by the Governor in Council on the ground that the whole of their time is at the disposal of some charitable institution,

6. Section 6 of this Ordinance introduces a section nuanimously recommended by the recent Stamp Duties Committee. It is intended to prevent the passing on of dividends to unregistered shareholders.

7. The effect of section 7 of this Ordinance will be that the stamp duty on an instrument of apprenticeship will in future be $1 instead of $20. The duty in England is 2s. 6d.

8. Section 8 of this Ordinance expands Heading No. 16 in the Schedule to the principal Ordinance so as to make it clearly apply to certain declarations of trust about which there might otherwise be some question.

9. Heading No. 15 in the Schedule to the principal Ordinance originally had a scale divided into two parts. This, however, was very soon altered, as Ordinance No. 21 of 1921 made the stamp duty $1 per $100 in all cases. Heading No. 15 deals with the stamp duty on conveyance on sale

It seem obvious that the stamp duty on foreclo- sure orders, which is dealt with in Heading No. 21, should have been altered at the same time. This was overlooked. Section 9 of this Ordinance now remedies that omission.

10. Heading No. 24 in the Schedule to the principal Ordinance, which deals with the stamp duty on leases, does not provide for the case where the term of the lease is indefinite. Section 10 of this Ordinance supplies this omission. The words adopted are mainly based upon the judgment of Hamilton J. in Mount Edgcumbe v. Inland Revenue Commissioners (1911) 2 K.B. 24.

11. Heading No. 24 in the Schedule to the principal Ordinance is open to another objection also, in that it makes the stamp duty on the surrender of a lease the same as the duty on the lease This seems to be inequitable and might work considerable hardship in some cases. Apparently in England the stamp duty would be only the ordinary deed stamp of 10s. Section 11 of this Ordinance makes the stamp duty on surrender of a lease the same duty as would be payable on a lease for the residue of the term surrendered, any consideration for surrender being regarded as premium.

12. Heading No. 29 (2) in the Schedule to the Stamp Ordinance makes the stamp duty on any additional or sub- stituted security 10 couts for every $100 of the principal sum secured. This seems unnecessarily heavy, as the value of any additional security might be quite small in comparison with the total sum secured. section 12 of this Ordinance provides that the duty in Accordingly such a case shall be 10 cents for every $100 of the value of the additional or substituted security. Section 12 also alters the language of the second coluinn of this sub-head- ing which left something to be desired.

28th September, 1929.

J. H. KEMP,

Attorney General.