S3 6 ENGLISH FINANCE 



tion of all land in the United Kingdom. The principle to be applied was easily stated, 

 but in application is found very complex, while the terms of the Act in these sections are 

 confessedly difficult, not to say obscure. The duties imposed were four, viz. the Incre- 

 ment Duly of 20% on the increase in value of the land site; the Undeveloped Land Duty 

 of ^d. in the on capital value: the Reversion Duty of 10 per cent on benefits accruing 

 at the termination of a Lease: and Mineral Rights Duty of is. in the on mineral rents, 

 way leaves, &c. These land value duties are not payable on agricultural land. 



There were some general provisions touching this revenue which deserve notice, 

 such as the instruction that premiums on the grant of new on-liquor licences shall be 

 paid into the Exchequer; that 5% shall be paid to county councils in Ireland on the 

 amount of the duty levied on motor-cars; and that the proceeds of the duties on motor 

 spirits, and on motor-car licences, shall be paid to a fund as a grant (under the Develop- 

 ment and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909) for road improvement. It may be 

 added that when the House of Commons passed the Bill a second time provisions were 

 added to confirm the collection of taxes while the Bill was passing the legislature. 



Whatever might be the political objections to the Budget of 1909, it has already 

 been shown that its operation resulted in raising the gross revenue from 151.5 in 1908-9 

 to 187.1 millions estimated in 1912-13, thus showing a growth of 35.6 

 sources of millions in the interval. A certain amount of the increase arose, however, 

 revenue from non-tax revenue, 7 millions from Postal Services alone. The tax- 

 "lected ' revenue in 1008-9 was 125.5: in 1911-12 (a normal year) it was 155 mil- 

 lions; in 1912-13 about 153.8 millions. The only change of substance in 

 1911-12 was the withdrawal bf the 2d. per Ib. customs duty on ground cocoa, 

 which involved about 60,000 only; but the tax revenue for 1912-13 showed 

 an expectation of 28.3 millions above 1908-9. A revised estimate in 1909-10 

 of the anticipated effect of the new taxes gave a total of 125 millions for that 

 year, and 17.7 millions ultimately, but this last was exclusive of spirits, liquor 

 licences, and the land value duties. A comparison of the differences between the 

 revenue derived from various chief heads in 1908-9, and in 1912-13, will be instructive. 

 Customs yielded more by 4.7: Excise by 4.1: Estate Duties by 7.1: Stamps by 

 1.7: and Income Tax (including Super Tax which yielded 3 millions in 1911-12) by 

 10.2 millions. The House Duty also continues to show a growing yield. These are 

 remarkable figures, no doubt, and speak much of the resources of the country. Each 

 of these items, too, when compared with the expectation of 1909, shows a fulfilment of 

 hopes, with the doubtful exception of the Excise, while the changes in Income Tax, 

 estimated to produce an extra 6j millions, actually produced io| millions. The Land 

 Value Duties, on the other hand, which were originally estimated to produce 600,000 

 in the first year (and much more ultimately), proved disappointing, the results being 

 (1910-11) 520,000, (1911-12) 481,000, (1912-13, estimated) 545,000. Much revenue 

 from this source could not be expected indeed, until the land valuation of the whole 

 kingdom, affording a datum for the duties, had been completed, which could not be 

 earlier than 1915. Meanwhile the larger part of the revenue from those land value du- 

 ties is derived from the Mineral Rights Duty, the yield of the others being small. 



Both direct and indirect sources were appealed to for the additions to revenue. The 

 new indirect taxes (tobacco, alcoholic drinks, and liquor licences) contributed 8.8 out 

 of the 28.3 millions by which the revenue of 1912-13 exceeded that of 1908-9. On the 

 direct side there "are additions to taxes on property, like the Estate duties, and largely 

 the Stamps, and the half million from Land Value duties, and finally the high rate of is. 

 2d. in the on income-tax (coupled with a super-tax) which in 1912-13 yielded over 

 44 millions. The concrete results of the Budget of 1909-10, which for 1912-13 drew 

 additional revenue of 8.8 millions from indirect, and 19.5 millions from direct taxation, 

 were naturally pointed to in 1912 by Mr. Lloyd George as justifying his policy. 



Not unconnected with the incidence of the new taxation were some applications of 

 the revenue to be raised, such as the provision of a Development Fund, and of a Road 

 Improvement Fund. In 1909 an Act to form Boards, &c., to manage these Funds was 



