it the changed conditions. In consequence of the
decay of some of the towns allowances had to be made to them, amounting
to over 15% (L6000), which, with other deductions, lowered the yield
from a "tenth and fifteenth" to L31,000. As a supplement a land tax,
affecting only the large owners, was voted at the rate of 5% in 1404,
and repeated with wider scope, but at the lower rate of 1-2/3%, in
1411. A house tax made its appearance in 1428. Taxes on knight's fees
and other freeholds were also tried, while in 1435 and 1450 the
graduated income tax was employed. The minimum rate, 2-1/2%, applied to
incomes under L100 (or under L20 in the tax of 1450), and rose to 10% on
the higher incomes. These devices are evidence of the demand for larger
revenue, and also of the increasing unfitness of the existing direct
taxation. It may be added that they indicate a disposition to adopt
foreign models, particularly the methods of taxation in use in France
and Italy. As to indirect taxation the receipts seem at first to have
declined, and the subsidies were only granted for fixed terms (the
victory of Agincourt gained a life grant to Henry V.). After the
establishment of Edward IV. on the throne, the idea of a "tenth," in the
literal sense, was taken up and voted (1472) by the two houses as a
special military provision; but it failed to bring in the required
revenue, and the king had to fall back on grants of the old-established
form. Extra taxes on aliens were levied under both Lancastrian and
Yorkist rulers with little profit. The most original contribution of
Edward IV. to fiscal policy was the "benevolence" (q.v.) or payment by
wealthy subjects of sums requested by the king. Voluntary in form, these
payments were, in fact, compulsory, and became in later times one of the
great grievances against which parliament had to struggle.

Broader issues in finance marked the course of the Tudor period, and
these were connected with the general history of the time. The era of
national monarchies had arrived, necessitating the maintenance of
greater military and naval forces, as well as more costly machinery of
administration. External policy was affected by the set of ideas that
developed into mercantilism (see MERCANTILE SYSTEM); but so also was
fiscal policy. Finance reflected the actions of the personal rule that
was the characteristic of the 16th century. Within the period, however,
some decided contrasts are to be found. Prudence, carried