8 / 244
upon the consideration or value o f the property
passing, is unprecedented in the history of taxation,
and that the public were shocked in December,
1947, when these rates o f duty were announced.
Certainly, the solicitors’ profession were shocked
by these proposals, and the Council at once met to
consider them. The then Minister for Finance,
Mr. Aiken, in introducing the proposals, stated
that their object was to stop speculation in house
property values which was at its peak in the Autumn
o f 1947. It was not stated at that time that the
tax was imposed for the purpose o f revenue. The
case which was made by the Minister was that the
continuing inflation in house and land property
values had to be ended in the interests o f our social
economy, and particularly in the interests o f persons
o f modest means who were unable to purchase
houses to live in, or who were induced to purchase
them with the aid of loans for amounts which were
beyond their means. The Council discussed the
matter in the light o f this information, and it was
decided, that in view o f the Minister’s statement,
and whether he was right or wrong in his view that
taxation o f this kind would prevent or stop in
flation, that the Council could not, at that time,
oppose the Act in principle. It was, however,
decided to keep the matter in view, and to raise it
with the Minister at the first opportunity after
experience o f the tax would have shown its effects.
As you all know, the inflation in land and house
values has ended, and if the tax was imposed with
this object in view, it seems to have achieved its
purpose. In the view of the Council, there is no longer
any case for the continuance o f this penal taxation
directed at one section o f the community, namely,
owners or prospective owners o f land and house
property. It is questionable whether there were
not other means o f discouraging inflation than a
tax o f this kind; but there is certainly no longer
any justification for the continuance o f the tax.
The Minister for Finance, in the Budget pro
posals, has stated that the tax must be continued
for the time being, and from this statement it would
appear that the increased stamp duties are being
continued, not for their economic and social effects,
but for fiscal reasons, and that the tax is now being
regarded from the point o f view o f its yield to the
Exchequer. I wish again to reiterate the unfair
and penal nature o f a tax o f this kind. I f revenue
is required it should not be sought from one
section of the community, many o f whom are
least in the position to pay it. These stamp duties
have now assumed the form o f a capital levy imposed
upon one particular form o f capital, namely, house
property and land, and the persons from whom the
levy is being exacted are in many eases, those who
for one reason or another are forced to change their
residences, possibly for domestic reasons such as
growing families, or persons who intend to marry,
and who wish to purchase a residence in which to
settle down. Both o f these classes are being
mulcted to the extent o f 5 per cent, o f their capital.
With regard to the duty o f 25 per cent, being
exacted, in the main, from persons immigrating
here from England, it is, in my personal view,
questionable whether a prohibitive tax o f this kind
is, in the long run, in the national interest. I f each
country were to set up taxation barriers o f this kind
against their neighbours, it is apparent that the flow
o f commerce and ordinary international relations
would be seriously impaired.
Before the recent Budget proposals, a deputation
from the Council was received by the Minister for
Finance, with great consideration, and at a time
when the demands upon him must have made it
extremely inconvenient for him to receive the
deputation. A reasoned statement o f the case for
the abolition o f these duties was placed before him.
It was pointed out that the stamp duty on the sale
o f stock exchange securities is only 2 per cent.,
and that many stock exchange transactions are o f a
speculative nature whereas there are very few
speculative sales o f purchases o f land or houses at
the present time, and that it is unfair to tax the
purchaser from necessity o f a house at a higher rate
than the speculative dealer in stocks and shares.
The Minister indicated that the tax had brought in
a very large sum to the Exchequer during the present
year, and while he was unable, in view of the forth
coming Budget, to give any information as to his
intentions, the deputation inferred that there was
little hope that the tax would be remitted in the
coming Finance Act owing to the exigencies of
public finance. This has been borne out by the
Minister’s Budget statement; we can only hope
that the Government realises the hardship which
is imposed upon persons o f small means by this
penal stamp duty, and that in next year’s Budget
their grievances will be redressed.
One o f the secondary effects o f the new rates
o f stamp duty which was apparently unforeseen
when the Act was passed was the state o f chaos
which it caused, and which still exists, in the
machinery o f assessing stamp duty, and the
consequent delay in having documents o f title
stamped and registered. Before December, 1947,
a deed lodged in the Adjudication branch o f the
Revenue Commissioners for assessment o f stamp
duty could be taken up within a week with the
duty assessed. The assessment and payment of
stamp duty has now become an extremely
complicated operation owing to the provisions of
4