asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer in what terms he has replied to the letter relating to the petrol tax, dated 26th March, addressed to him by the Chairman of the British Road Federation.
With the agreement of the Federation, the text of my reply is given below.7th April, 1952.DEAR LORD SANDHURST,You wrote to me on 26th March about the recent increase in the duty on hydrocarbon oils.I am afraid that I do not think it would be appropriate for me to comment in detail on this subject so shortly before the question is likely to be debated in Parliament on the Committee Stage of the Finance Bill. I am sure you will appreciate this. I can, however, assure your Federation that full weight was given to the considerations referred to in your letter of 10th December, 1951, but for the reasons given in my Budget Speech, I came to the conclusion that notwithstanding the arguments on the other side, the additional revenue required to finance the important reductions in taxation had to be obtained by an increase in the duty on these oils.Yours sincerely,(Sgd.) R. A. BUTLER.The Lord Sandhurst, O.B.E.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much he estimates was obtained in petrol tax from industry and agriculture, respectively, in respect of light hydrocarbon oils used for purposes other than transport in the financial years 1938–39, 1948–49, 1949–50, 1950–51 and 1951–52; and how much he expects to obtain in the year 1952–53.
The figures are as follows:
|ESTIMATED RECEIPTS OF DUTY FROM LIGHT HYDROCARBON OILS USED FOR NON-TRANSPORT PURPOSES IN INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE|
|—||1938–39||1948–49||1949–50||1950–51||1951–52||1952–53 (expected receipts)|
|NOTE: There were increases in the rate of duty in April 1950, April 1951, and March, 1952.|