20 / 244
P. Mayne, William S. Huggard, Reginald J. Nolan,
James R. Quirke, Roger Greene, John D. O’Connell,
J. Travers Wolfe, Arthur Cox, Patrick F. O’Reilly,
Sean O hUadhaigh, Thomas A. O’Reilly, George
A. Overend, Gerald J. O’Donnell, Daniel O’Connell.
The following was among the business transacted:
Application under Section 18
O
n
a report from the Court o f Examiners, it was
ordered that an application by an intending appren
tice to the Chief Justice for exemption from the
Preliminary Examination o f this Society should not
be opposed.
Members’ subscriptions
O
n
a report from the Finance Committee it was
decided to issue bankers’ orders to members for
payment o f their annual subscriptions direct from
the members’ bank accounts to the Society’ s account
in the Bank o f Ireland.
Land Registry delays
I
t
was decided to make further representations to
the Minister for Justice concerning the delays in
the transaction o f business in the Land Registry,
due to shortage o f staff.
FINANCE BILL, 1949
I
n
March last, a deputation from the Council was
received by the Minister for Finance. The object
o f the deputation was to urge upon the Minister
that the increased rates o f stamp duty on transfers
o f land and house property should be repealed in
the Finance Bill, 1 949, and the rates o f duty in force
prior to December, 1947, should be restored. A
reasoned case for the reduction o f the duties was
made by the deputation, and carefully considered
by the Minister. As was stated in the President’s
speech at the half-yearly general meeting o f the
Society on 19th May, the Minister, while appreciating
the facts in the case put forth by the Society, was
unable, for financial reasons, to accede to the
request. It was stated at the interview that the
increased stamp duties had yielded over half-a-
million pounds in additional revenue during the
financial year, 1948-1949.
When the Budget Resolutions were introduced,
it was seen that the Government did not intend to
make any change in the rates o f duty. The Council
carefully considered the Budget Resolutions and
the Finance Bill, and decided to make representa-
tations to the Minister concerning a number of
technical difficulties which would arise from the
provisions o f the Bill, particularly in regard to the
investigation o f titles, and, in general, to point
out the complications introduced by Sections 24
to 27 which would lead to further delay in the
assessment o f stamp duties. A copy o f the rep
resentations made to the Minister was sent to each
solicitor who is a member o f Dail Rireann.
During the debate on the Committee Stage of
the Bill in the Dail, it was stated by a deputy that the
Incorporated Law Society o f Ireland was not
opposed to the rates of duty, and was confining its
objection to the technical aspects o f the Bill. The
deputy was mistaken in stating that this Society is
not opposed to the new rates o f duty. On the
contrary, the Council took every opportunity o f
impressing upon the Minister the inequitable nature
o f the heavy tax on transfers o f land and house
property. This is clear from the speech made
by the President at the half-yearly meeting on
19th May. When the attention o f the deputy con
cerned was drawn to the matter, he corrected his
speech by a letter in the morning newspaper which
had published it.
Section 24 o f the Finance Bill alters the rate of
stamp duty on leases, and changes the law as
declared in the recent case o f O’Sullivan
v.
the
Revenue Commissioners, in which it was decided
that the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1947, did not apply to
leases. In future, a lease reserving a fine will attract
the same rate o f duty in respect o f the fine as a con
veyance.
Sub-section (6) enables the Revenue
Commissioners, if they are o f opinion that the rent
reserved by a lease is inadequate, to assess it to
stamp duty as a voluntary conveyance. The section
is presumably intended to prevent the device o f
evading stamp duty on a voluntary conveyance
by drawing it in the form o f a lease at a nominal
rent.
Section 25 deals with the same subject matter as
Section 24. The object o f the section is to provide
for cases in which an instrument falling within
Section 24 may have been stamped between the
date o f the Budget Resolutions and the date o f
the passing o f the Finance Act.
The Budget
Resolutions have not the force o f law, but the
Finance Act when passed w ill be retrospective
to the 4th May, the date o f the passing o f the
Budget Resolutions.
Section 25 provides that
instruments falling within Section 24, stamped
at the lower rate between 4th May and the date
o f the coming into operation o f the Finance Act,
must be restamped with the difference in stamp
duty within 30 days from the last mentioned date,
on pain o f a penalty o f twice the stamp duty.
Sections 24 and 25 do not apply to any lease
first executed before 4th May, 1949.