The Gazette 1909-10

io

The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

[JUNE, 1909

interest had to pay a stamp duty on the con veyance which was assessed, not alone on the cash consideration actually passing at the time of the sale, but also on the amount which might be due at the date of such sale on foot of the advance which the Government had made at the time the holding was vested. Well, gentlemen, one of the proposals now occupying the attention of Parliament is, that the stamp duty, which was IDS. per cent., should now be doubled, and that for the future it should be charged at the rate of £ i per cent, on all conveyances. The effect of that resolution will be to turn this grievance into a real hardship, because, as you will understand, purchasers in the future will have to pay^i per cent., not only on the cash passing, but also on the amount due to the Government in respect of the holding which has been pur chased. I think the best way to explain this is to take an example. We will say a tenant- farmer who held his holding subject to a rent of £50 a. year purchases from his landlord, say, for twenty years' purchase. The Govern ment advance the purchase-money, which, in such a case, would amount to ^1000. And assuming the occupier sold his interest in the holding for ^500, the purchaser would have to pay the stamp duty—will have to pay this increased stamp duty of^i per hundred pounds, not only on the ^500 which he is paying over to the occupier, but also in respect of the ^1000 advanced, assuming that none of it had been repaid at the date of purchase. That is to say, he would have to pay 3 per cent, on the purchase, and that, I believe, was never con templated. It certainly was not contemplated at the time of the passing of the Land Pur chase Acts, because you will recollect that one of the inducements made at the time and held out to Irish landlords and tenants to avail themselves of the provisions of these Acts was that no stamp duty was to be paid in respect of money advanced in respect of the vesting of the holdings in the tenants. Of course you are aware the Chancellor of the Exchequer now proposes to introduce several new taxes, and to increase some of those already existing. But, gentlemen, these questions of finance and of policy which do not directly -affect this profession, we do not discuss at this moment. At the present moment what we refer to in this resolution which the Council have asked me to bring before you to-day are matters which will affect even our own profes sion, because it must tend to restrict the sales of the holdings (hear, hear). You will see I

gave a case in point, which is, perhaps, only a moderate one, to emphasize the effect of this new stamp duty on agricultural holdings. But you will see at once and make out for your selves that in similar holdings the duty would realby amount to more than the 3 per cent., and of course that would depend on the pur chase-money and its relative proportion to the amount outstanding to the Government. Under these circumstances I have pleasure in sub mitting this resolution for your consideration, and, I hope, for your adoption. MR. C. ST. G. ORPEN, Vice-President: I have much pleasure in seconding the resolu tion. After what the President has said, I need not say anything further. MR. R. A. MACNAMARA: I would like to say a few words on this subject. The duty now charged on the capitalised value is really charging duty on the rent. When a man purchased his holding, as the President has stated, he paid no duty except on the purchase- money. The Government never attempted to make him capitalize the rent and pay duty on that. The fact is, that now they treat the amount borrowed from the Land Commission as if it was a mortgage, and make him pay duty, not alone upon purchase-money, but upon rent. Of course we at one time raised the question with the Revenue authorities, but they held that without an Act of Parliament it would be impossible to apply a remedy. We consider that the time has now arrived when we may have an opportunity of getting an Act of Parliament by which this grievance might be remedied, and we strongly urge on the Government that in this respect the Finance Bill ought to be amended. It is doubly necessary now, as the duty having been raised from ros. to £i per cent., it would be a great grievance if they had to pay it (hear, hear). MR. D. A. QUAID : This question is a very important one, and is deserving of the support of the members of the Society and the members of the profession generally. But I think it is more than a question affecting us professionally. It is a public question, this increase of duty upon the sale of holdings throughout Ireland. The weakness, to my mind, of the resolution—if it is a weakness— is that it does riot go far enough. Whereas this practice of penalizing sales by tenant- purchasers has existed for some years past, no protest has been made against it, as far as I understand. If this mild resolution is passed, the Chancellor of the Exchequer may take up