The Film Renter and Moving Picture News (Jul-Aug 1922)

58 1HE FILM RENTER & MOVING PICTURE NEWS. July 15, 1922. YORKSHIRE AND THE TAX Abolition Committee’s Propaganda Posters Criticised—Do they Minister to Class Prejudice ? N interesting debate on the Entertainments Tax question took place at the July mecting of the Leeds C.B.A. branch. Captain Barber forwarded a letter drawing attention to the Government's action regarding the tax. He pointed out that the matter could be raised again when the Budget reached the finance stage. Captain Barber asked for united support from members of the C.E.A. with a view to creating public opinion in favour of the abolition or reduction of the tax, and said it could not be too clearly stated that the Entertainments Tax violuted one of the fundamental principles of British taxation, but it was quite clear that they would not get any redress unless and until they brought home the facts of the matter to the public. The letter went on to say that a new campaign was being launched with this object in view, and it was hoped that every member would do his utmost to help. The Chancellor's Reasons. Mr. T. H. Kave (chairman) said the ChanecHor of the Exchequer had stated that he could not grant relief unless he could be shown how to find the money raised by the tax in another direction, and had also said he did not think that the trade was in a worse plight than any other, pointing out that it was, after all, an infant trade which had assumed dimensions which were wonderful. The Chancellor appeared to think its abnormally rapid development had something to do with the losses incurred by pieture houses in 6orme districts. ‘“\No doubt,’ said Mr. Kaye, ‘ the Chancellor was right to some extent." He thought himself that the trade was suffering from the general slump and from the fact of the hig prices they had to pay for their films. The Chancellor had pointed to the fact that in Leeds a new picture house had been erected at a cost. of something like £350,000, and said that that did not seem to him to indicate that there was much wrone with the trade. ““T feel that there are sinister influences at work against the trade,’ said Mr. Kaye. They always seemed to be in evidence whenever the trade tried to do anything, Passing on the Relief. Mr. J. F. Martin thought the trouble was that they the abolition of the tax without that the relief would be passed on to the public, The idea outside seemed to be that if any relief that was granted was to go to the trade, then the trade could Took after itself, and if the publie was not to benefit, why should the public bother? The Chairman added that no doubt at the beginning of the campaign it was one of the big questions as to whether any relief which might be obtained should be paseed on to the publie or not. Mr. Martin expressed the view asked for intimating that the trade would have done much better if it had concentrated on equalisation of the taxation, They were still talking of total abolition, and were doing themselves harm by so doing. lines of equalisation of taxation port of a strong party vote in the House of Commons. It seemml to him they were wasting beth talking about abolition of the tax, Tf they had gone on the . they might have got the sup time and money in 3 Google The Chairman: We are not talking about it now; we have known for some time that we should not get it. Mr. Martin replied that if it was a reduction of taxation to benefit: merely one trade, they couldn't expect the support of the members of the House of Commons, The Chairman went on to say that, after all, this was a luxury tax imposed as a war-time measure on the understanding that it would be removed after abolition, of course the war. The arguinent against its was that it was very exsily collected, and the revenue it sstehbuesel was very usctul, Like the dog with the juicy bone, the Government would not let go unless they were donned to do. Lower Prices and Larger Receipts. Mr. J. Mackenzie said it was quite clear that if it was the intention to pass on the relief to the publie, the trade would not have gone to the trouble aad expense that they had done in the matter. He recalled that early in the campaign they were told that if they spoke about the point of view of the public they would have no ehance with the Government, Mr. H. Oates suid a great many exhibitors worked hard to secure some alleviation of the tax because they believed that, if granted, it would benefit: the kinemas by cheapening the cost to the public and so enabling patrons to pay more visits. The Chairman added that the Chancellor was not) prepared to listen to any arguments for the relief of the tax for the benefit of the publie, Tf they had gone to him with that proposition, he would have at once said “* Tf vou can afford to pass on the relief of the tax to the public, then it is clear that as a trade you don't require it.’ That would not have been quite true, lecause even if the relief had been passed on entirely to the public, it would have bencfited the exhibitors indirectly. | An exhibitor of his acquaintanee in the county of Notts tried the experiment of paying the tax himself and reducing the prices of seats to the public. Almost iminediately inercased as a result. Mr. Martin eaid it was only natural that the publie would patronise a picture house where the prices were easiest, provided that the program was up to standard. his attendances Screens for Propaganda. Mr. Mackenzie thought the suggestion to utilise their screens for propaganda purposes was very unwise, Mr. Oates termed it ‘t very dangerous.”’ The Chairman pointed out that the posters issued by the Tax Abolition Committee with the object of influencing public opinion were very strong propaganda, and made a strong appeal to class prejudice. Mr. Mackenzie : It is a great mistake. I hope I shall never be a party to it. The Chairman termed it ‘ a very dangerous precedent.” Those in the business know that it wasn’t altogether taxation that was killing the trade. The plunge in prices and the general slump were concerned. =