Benjamin Kipkirui Langat

All parliamentary appearances

Entries 1631 to 1640 of 2560.

• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: To take the Members to Clause 5, this Bill had provided that all the expenditure which is incurred by the employer to finance the employee to go for local tourism will be allowed for tax purposes. I am proposing to limit that facility for one year, so that it ends on 1st July, 2015. I am also saying that the vacation period shall not exceed seven days. The reason is that we can have as many people as possible enjoying that benefit. The other thing that we are trying to do is to extend the definition of “employee” in that ... view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I think there is a problem here. view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, also help us; we are on Clause 5, and hon. Members are going back to clause 3, which we passed a long time ago. The best way is for us to be where we are right now, which is at clause 5. I will do another explanation for the benefit of the many who never understood my earlier explanation. view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, let me go back to my explanation. I have already said that clause 5 in the original Bill relates to expenditure incurred by an employer on his employees to go for local tourism, which clause 5 sought to allow for tax purposes to make employers encourage their employees to know their country. The amendment I am proposing is this, I am saying that, that provision should be restricted to one year, which is up to next year, 1st July. When you allow it, it will mean the Government will be losing some revenue, but we are ... view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I have understood what Hon. (Dr.) Simiyu meant. Under clause 5(2), what the amendment seeks to do is that currently low income employees have a benefit of food. They are not taxed but only when it is provided within the premises of the employer. What happens is that there are many employers with many employees, but they may not maintain a cafeteria system. It is discriminatory to say that those who are able to provide in house facility to do so. Since priority is to employees, then we can say even the same for employees who ... view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, given the fact that the House rejected my earlier amendment and this is part of it, I withdraw this amendment. view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: Hon. Temporary Deputy Chairman, I beg move:- view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: THAT, Clause 10 be deleted and replaced with the following new clause- Amendment to section 34 of Cap.470 10. Section 34 of the Income Act is amended – view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: (a) in subsection (1) by inserting the following new view
• 27 Aug 2014 in National Assembly: paragraph immediately after paragraph (i) – view