REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
| Published date | 01 May 1954 |
| Date | 01 May 1954 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1954.tb02154.x |
REPORTS
OF
COMMITTEES
REPORT
OF
THE
COMMITTEE
ON
THE
TAXATION TREATMENT
OF
PROVISIONS
FOR
RETIREMENT (Cmd.
9063)
IT
might be said without undue exaggeration that the Report of
the Millard Tucker Committee is the most significant social docu-
ment published in this country since the Beveridge Report. But
whether it reveals an equally desirable tendency towards social
democracy is perhaps more dubious.
As
Professor Titmuss recently pointed out in
The
Times,’
the
growing popularity of superannuation schemes in commerce and
industry, and the taxation advantages attaching to them, are
rapidly dividing the working population of this country into two
classes-those who are dependent for retirement on the National
Insurance Scheme and those who enjoy the infinitely greater benefits
obtained through their employers’ retirement schemes.
As
yet,
however, the latter class is far from homogeneous since the various
types of scheme differ greatly amongst themselves both in the
benefits thereby secured and in their treatment for taxation pur-
poses.
If
the recommendations of the Committee are implemented
a
considerable measure of uniformity will be introduced in both
these respects. This alone would aggravate, rather than minimise,
the rift between the two classes. To some extent, however, this
tendency would be counteracted as a result
of
the further recom-
mendations whereby those not participating in pension schemes
(e.g.,
the self-employed, controlling and part-time directors, and
those employed in posts not covered by any employer’s scheme)
would be afforded comparable taxation relief in
so
far as they
provided out of their own savings for similar benefits.
To this extent the recommendations seem eminently desirable.
In particular they.wil1 gladden the hearts of the self-employed pro-
fessional classes, such as the legal profession-and especially the
barristers’ branch of
it
which at present finds it virtually impossible
to make adequate arrangements for retirement. Equally, there is
much to be said for the basic taxation principle advocated by the
Committee. Briefly, this principle is that contributions to schemes
approved by the Revenue shall be allowable as expenses and that
benefits ultimately received shall be taxed. Further the conditions
for Revenue approval suggested by the Committee should eradicate
the worst features of some of the present
“
top hat
”
schemes. But
when this has been said, the proposals are subject to formidable
objections which seem to require the most careful consideration.
The main objections may be summarised as follows
:-
For
December
29
and
30,
1953.
241
To continue reading
Request your trial