Firstly to Belarus and Tax Information Exchange Agreements.  It was reported in this month’s STEP Journal that Belarusian human rights campaigner Ales Belyatsky has been arrested.  He was arrested soon after the Polish authorities gave the Belarusian authorities information relating to his bank accounts.   The Belarusian authorities had described him as a suspect in a tax investigation.  The Poles treated this as a routine request and handed over full details of his bank accounts.  He has been charged with tax evasion via a foreign bank account.  Belyatsky says the foreign bank account is used only to collect foreign contributions to his political movement.  The Polish Government has admitted it should not have disclosed Belyatsky’s bank details and has sacked the director and deputy head of its international cooperation department.

HMRC announced this week that approximately six million people are set to receive tax rebates averaging £400.  Another million people will learn they have underpaid their tax by about £600.  It is the second year that tax and National Insurance discrepancies have been identified by a new computer system.  HMRC said that the number of cases would reduce “as the new system beds in”.  Those who will be told they have not paid enough tax are expected to owe between £500 and £600 on average.  In a similar exercise last year, HMRC were criticised for being insensitive over their treatment of underpayers.  Another example of the complexity surrounding the UK tax system.

The Scottish Government announced a consultation on giving local authorities new powers to tax empty homes. The proposals would give local authorities the power to impose an extra levy of up to 100% of the standard charge. It is hoped that this could help raise millions of pounds to build new affordable houses.  The announcement stated that 25,000 properties have been empty for more than six months and are liable to pay council tax.  In Glasgow there are over 1,800 empty homes.  It is also claimed that if every local authority decide to use these powers they could raise up to £30 million per year.  I wrote about the connected issue of how local authorities are using funds gained from reducing the council tax discount in an earlier tax blog.  This blog can be found here.

This is something I have not come across before.  The Intergenerational Foundation called for tax breaks to encourage downsizing and help free up some of the estimated 25 million unused bedrooms in England.  The charity says that older people should be encouraged to move into smaller homes to help tackle England’s housing crisis.  The UK Government did not respond positively to this proposal.

Both sides in the battle over what independent schools have to do to justify their charitable status claimed victory last week.  The Independent Schools Council and the England and Wales Charity Commission are each claiming that the decision of the Upper Tax Tribunal vindicates their position. A similar debate is taking place in Scotland.  The tax issue here is the fact charities have a number of tax advantages including rates relief.

Now to the fiscal powers debate. Interesting to see Malcolm Chisholm MSP openly reject the Calman proposals. His comments mirror views recently expressed by former First Minister Henry McLeish.  Malcolm Chisholm is the first serving Labour MSP to openly reject the Calman proposals. The Scottish Government has renewed its call for control over Air Passenger Duty after the UK Government cut air passenger duty for Northern Ireland.  I also suspect that the Scotland Bill may be mentioned once or twice at the SNP conference which began yesterday.  The announcement that North Sea oil production will continue to at least 2050 ensures that oil and gas tax revenue is back at the top of the political agenda.

I have been asked to speak at Holyrood Magazine’s Scotland Bill conference on 8 November.  More information can be found here.  I can already hear myself saying: “does Scotland need a separate Registers of Scotland, Stamp Office, Companies House and Inheritance Tax office? Then again I have been making that point for 5 years now and no-one seems to be listening.

Have a good weekend.

Firstly to Australia.  Australia’s House of Representatives has narrowly voted in favour of the Clean Energy Bill.  The Bill was passed by 74 votes to 72.   The tax will be introduced on 1 July next year.  The Australian Government plans to tax the carbon pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels including coal and petroleum.   The closeness of the vote and George Osborne’s comments at his party conference show how far the carbon tax debate has still to run.

Rafael Nadal has defended his decision not to compete next year at the traditional pre-Wimbledon warm up at Queens.  It was also recently reported that Usain Bolt is not going to compete in the UK before the London Olympics.   They each claim that if they compete they would be out of pocket due to UK tax rules.  Under UK tax rules foreign sports stars are taxed on a proportion of their entire global income rather than the just the money they earn in the UK.

The UK Government shows no sign of changing these rules although it is worth remembering that a concession was made for the 2010 Champuons League final at Wembley.  The concession, announced in the 2010 budget was a key condition laid down by UEFA for staging the final.  A similar concession is in place for next year’s Olympics.  What though of the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow?

More bad publicity for HMRC.  Dave Hartnett, permanent secretary for tax at HMRC is facing demands to quit after being accused of lying over a deal that spared Goldman Sachs a multimillion pound tax bill for its bankers’ bonuses. The article from the Independent can be found here.

The most interesting fiscal powers announcement this week comes from Wales.   The Secretary of State for Wales, Cheryl Gillian has announced the composition of a commission to assess the way that Wales is funded.  This could result in the Welsh Assembly being granted borrowing and tax raising powers.   The Commission will be led by Paul Silk, a former clerk to the Welsh Assembly.  The fact that I have mentioned Wales gives me the chance to wish them all the best tomorrow.

The announcement that BP is to to go ahead with a £4.5bn project off Shetland re-ignited the debate over the UK Government’s recent decision to raise the supplementary tax on North Sea oil production from 20% to 32%.  Claim and counterclaim over how much oil is left or whose oil this is will no doubt continue in the run up to the independence referendum.  The amount of coverage that this announcement received shows how important the oil industry is to the UK economy and in particular the tax take for the UK Treasury.

And finally, a little bit of good news from Europe.  The European Commission has published a report showing that EU member states’ tax revenues are rising again after a marked fall in 2008 and 2009.

Have a good weekend.

Tax stories from all four home nations and Denmark this week.

I will though start with some facts and figures.  It was reported this week that the average pensioner household paid £5,124 in tax over the past year.  That means the average UK pensioner household pays out 27% of its income to HMRC.  That is a combination of direct and indirect taxes which add up to an annual tax bill of more than £34 billion.   Further evidence of how large a contribution this age group contributes to national and local government finances.

Now to Wales and the Welsh Government’s introduction of a plastic bag tax.   Anyone who wants a plastic container to carry their shopping in will need to pay a 5p levy for the privilege.  They will also need to pay for plastic packaging for fast food items.

Staying with fast food but moving to Denmark.  Denmark has introduced what is believed to be the world’s first “fat tax”.  They have introduced a surcharge on foods that are high in saturated fat.  Butter, milk, cheese, pizza, meat, oil and processed food are now subject to the tax if they contain more than 2.3% saturated fat.  The UK Government are also considering such a tax the Scottish Government are not.  The  Scottish Government plans to work with manufacturers instead.

Now to Edinburgh and the latest local politician to suggest a tax change.   This time it is Colin Keir SNP MSP for Edinburgh Western.  His idea is to cut VAT rates for the tourism and golf services industry and as presently happens in Ireland.

There were this week a number of interesting announcements on additional tax powers for the Scottish Parliament.  The Scottish Government has called for the revenue from alcohol duty to be devolved to Scotland.  That makes sense when you consider that health is already devolved.  What though of tobacco duty?  Also why is the Scottish Government simply asking for this revenue to be assigned to it but not the power to vary duty rates or control over the underlying law?  I suspect that this “request” will receive the same reaction from the UK Government as the call for control of corporation tax and the Crown Estate.

More interesting was the call from a group of newly elected Tory MPs for the Scottish Parliament to have full tax raising powers in a book billed as the way forward for the Conservative Party.

Mixed news for Northern Ireland on fiscal powers this week.  Looks as if it will be given some Air Passenger Duty powers but that the devolving of some restricted powers over corporation tax will be at best delayed.

Few surprises at the Tory conference.   George Osborne confirms the English Council tax freeze and that there will be no temporary tax cuts.  This almost certainly means no change to the 50p rate of income tax or VAT.   The Tories also confirmed their opposition to a European Union financial transactions tax.  Iain Duncan Smith did though go off message when he called for breaks for the poor and married couples.

No shortage of matters to blog about this week.

I think I will start with Edinburgh and in particular the City of Edinburgh Council.  Last week a “hotel bed” tax was proposed by Jenny Dawe leader of the Council.  This idea has been recycled a number of times over the last few years.  This week she proposed a voluntary “festival ticket” tax.  Clearly the Council are turning their minds to how they might meet any future funding shortfall.  Not yet clear if this is just kite flying by Councillor Dawe or whether there is serious support for one or both of these ideas.  I do though like the fact that a local politician is willing to enter into this sort of debate.

Moving on to the Scottish Parliament and John Swinney’s latest Spending Review.  Business rates have dominated the coverage of the Spending Review.  There has been a public debate. For debate read “slanging match”, between the Scottish Government and the “Centre for Public Policy and the Regions” over how much business rates revenue is going to increase over the next few years and also what the causes of this increase will be.    This debate has surprisingly overshadowed the proposal for a new “public health levy” on the business rates of large alcohol and tobacco retailers.

Interested to see that Ken Macintosh, one of candidates for the leadership of the Scottish Labour party – and yes I can name the other candidates as well – says if elected and if he wins the next Scottish General Election he would cut the Scottish rate of income tax.  Not that we have a Scottish rate of income tax yet and it is not even certain that the Scottish Government will accept the income tax proposals contained in the Scotland Bill.  Nonetheless this is a welcome sign that that the Labour party in Scotland are joining the fiscal powers debate.

More evidence has been given this week on the Scotland Bill.  As noted by a number of commentators this week we are in the position that very few people seem happy with the fiscal and tax provisions as proposed.  Numerous questions remain over the income tax proposals.  Some minor taxes recommended for devolving by the Calman Commission have not even been included in the Bill.  One of these, Air Passenger Duty, is to be devolved to Northern Ireland.  A pattern does appear to be forming here.  Borrowing powers, corporation tax and now Air Passenger Duty.

The UK Government is unhappy with the Scottish Government.  The Scottish Government is unhappy with the UK Government and in particular the UK Treasury.  No side seems to be acknowledging how complicated all of this is.   This has “it is going to end in tears” written all over it.  I still don’t understand why so much energy is being wasted on income tax and corporation tax when there are numerous other taxes which would be much easier to devolve.  These taxes even if a majority were devolved would not provide as much revenue as income tax but would provide a greater number and a more wide-ranging set of economic levers for the Scottish Parliament.  Still I am sure our politicians know what they are doing.

One suggestion.  There are going to be two new Scottish taxes: Stamp Duty Land Tax and aggregates levy.  Can I suggest that the Scottish Government involves the Scottish Law Commission in the drafting of the legislation of these taxes.  Two reasons.  Firstly the expertise, experience and reputation of this body is second to none.  In addition, as more taxes are likely to be devolved, this will ensure that we start the job of creating an expert group going forward.  The recent Scottish Government paper on Corporation Tax shows just how much work requires to be done before such taxes can be devolved.

Now to Liverpool and the Labour party conference this week.  Ed Balls renewed his call for a cut in VAT and in particular a reduction to 5% for VAT on building repairs and renovations to residential property.   I have previously blogged on the Scottish campaign for a 5% VAT rate for repairs and renovations and in particular on the fact that the Isle of Man has already negotiated such a reduction with the UK Treasury.

Let’s not forget Europe in these troubled times.  The European Commission has now formally called for a new tax on financial transactions amongst EU members.  Note EU members not Euro members.  The UK Government has made its opposition clear to this proposal and in particular on the ground that it would primarily be a “London tax”.  Not yet seen or heard what the Scottish Government think of this proposal.

I wonder if the European Commission’s proposal will be mentioned at the UK Conservative party conference.

Interesting article in the Scotland on Sunday on HMRC’s power to inspect the tax records of small businesses.

HMRC has confirmed that it is proceeding with its programme to inspect the tax records of small businesses despite facing a barrage of criticism since a pilot was first announced in March.

The article questions whether HMRC has the power to impose a fine of up to £3,000 if  the tax records of a small business are not up to date.

I agree with the comment by Colin Borland of the Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland: “If businesses received guidance rather than fines the checks could be a positive move, but in their current form they were creating alarm among many small business.”

The article can be found here.

Back to the grind!

Highlight of the week for me was the publication of Reform Scotland’s latest fiscal powers paper “Devolution Plus”.  I do though have to declare an interest as I am one of the authors of this paper.  The paper outlines a possible third option, if there are to be three options put to the Scottish people instead of a straight yes or no to independence.  The paper can be found here.

The debate over the top rate of income tax also continued.  What was interesting was the claim by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that the 50p tax rate may not raise any extra revenue for HM Treasury and could actually reduce it due to high earners using avoidance measures.   HM Treasury has already revised downwards its predictions of the amount that could be raised from the 50% rate from £7 billion a year to about £2.4 billion.

Excellent article in the Herald on Tax Increment Financing.  It appears that nearly half of Scotland’s councils have made applications to the Scottish Futures Trust for permission to pilot TIF schemes.  TIF involves mortgaging the future income from local business rates to borrow money from HM Treasury’s public works loan board.   The Scottish Government has already been working with Edinburgh, Glasgow and North Lanarkshire councils for several years to set up TIF schemes for Leith Harbour, Buchanan Galleries shopping centre and Ravenscraig.  The article can be found here.

A word of caution on TIF.  I first came across TIF when working as an attorney in Chicago.  One issue that has arisen in Chicago is that if too many TIF schemes are approved the benefits are diluted.

I find myself agreeing with the comments made by Everhseds LLP on the Institute for Fiscal Studies’ Mirrlees Review of the UK’s tax system.  The problem with such a major reform is that we are not starting with a blank sheet of paper.  Making such radical changes would require a huge amount of resources and even more political will.  Neither of which appears to be present just now.

The Scottish perspective is slightly different as we will have a sheet of paper that even if not blank at least has numerous blank spaces in it when tax and fiscal powers are devolved to the Scottish Parliament.  This is in fact an opportunity, possibly a once in a generation opportunity, to do something different.  Hopefully this is a point that those on, and those giving evidence to, the Scottish Parliament’s Scotland Bill Committee will consider.   The Eversheds comments can be found here.

Always nice to get away from things for a while.  Islay gives you a different perspective.

Tax has only featured in three conversations here and as each also mentioned whisky I felt that made it acceptable.  The general sentiment seemed to be: “Islay gives a lot to the UK Exchequer every year and we get very little back in return”.

One person I spoke to told me that: “Islay’s whisky industry contributes approximately £100 million a year to the UK government in excise duty and value-added tax.”  To put that into context, and if that figure is correct,  that is about £30,000 for every man, woman and child on the island.

The main tax stories of the past week have a familiar feel to them.

The debate over devolving complete control over corporation tax to the Scottish Parliament has continued.  This week saw HM Treasury predicting doom and gloom if such a thing were to come to pass.  More ammunition for those wanting to see a Scottish Exchequer.

In a connected issue, Scotland’s First Minister said that the oil industry should be consulted on any new changes to offshore taxation.  The background to this is the proposal by the UK government to increase the supplementary charge on oil production from 20 to 32 per cent.

The other major political tax debate also rumbles on.  That being the top rate of income tax.  This still feels like a “phoney war” but you also get the feeling that a formal start to hostilities might just be round the corner.  The main warring parties in this case being the coalition partners of the UK Government.

This week saw twenty economists (makes you wonder what a group of economists is called), in a letter to the Financial Times, urging the UK Government to drop the top 50p tax rate.  They claim it is doing “lasting damage” to the UK economy.   The top rate is paid at 50p for each pound earned over £150,000 and affects around 310,000 people.  Opponents say cutting the top rate at a time of cuts would be “monstrously unfair” and “phenomenally immoral”.  UK Government Ministers continue to hedge their bets by saying that the 50p rate is temporary and that their policy is to first increase the income tax threshold to £10,000.

Although not as widely reported as the two issues above, I did like the council tax news item from the Courier.  The report explained how funds raised by increasing the council tax on second homes had helped to pay for affordable housing projects across the Perth and Kinross Council area.

In February 2005 Perth and Kinross Council agreed that additional money collected by reducing the council tax discount on second homes and long-term empty properties could be used to support the development of affordable housing.   The Council  reduced the 50% second home discount to 10%.  The reduction covers around 1,800 properties.

Back to the mainland tomorrow!

A week that saw HMRC step up pressure on Rangers FC, calls for a tax on “junk food” in The Lancet and reports on how Bonn uses a  meter to tax its prostitutes.  I did like the argument put forward against the use of this meter by a prostitutes’ rights activist: “double taxation”.

The Liberal Democrats are making almost all of the running on tax ideas and policy just now.  The debate, for debate read argument, over whether to retain the present top rate of income tax and/or introduce a “mansion tax” continues between the partners in the UK coalition government.  In addition the Liberals are calling for a proper examination of how a “land tax” might work.

Attendees of last night’s annual CBI Scotland dinner heard, in between the odd constitutional reference, its UK President Sir Roger Carr, criticise the UK’s “punitive” tax regime and HM Treasury’s “misguided” levy on North Sea oil production.

Not surprised to hear of HMRC’s role in the “Mortgage Verification Scheme” and that it is to start scaling back its “time to pay policy”.  That is a scheme that allows a businesses additional time to pay its tax bill.

Surprised that those calling for a reduced rate of VAT on home repairs and renovations are not making more use of the fact that the Isle of Man has negotiated such an agreement with HM Treasury.

Not a dull week.

It was reported in The Lancet last week that an international group of researchers are recommending that “junk food” should be taxed.

Watching a piece on the news last night on this issue it seemed that this proposal will follow what I see as the “usual pattern”.  Recent examples include: “transient guest” or bed tax, minimum price for alcohol, plastic bag levy, European transaction tax, bank levy, carbon tax and non-doms charge.

An organisation or government suggests a tax or charge.  The press report it.  A debate begins on whether the tax is to change behaviour or raise funds.  Often the proposer suggesting the tax is not sure or fails to make clear that the answer is both.  That often provides its opponents an easy line of attack.  In most cases no thought has been given to what rate the tax will be charged at or how and by whom it will be collected or even how much is likely to be raised.  Again if the proposers have not thought of this its opponents have an easy line of attack.

In some cases, such as when environmental taxes were being suggested, a cynical person might have concluded that the “change behaviour” argument was used by some backers when in fact they really just wanted the revenue.

Then the appropriate trade body argues that taxation is not the answer and some form of voluntary agreement will do just as well.  A trade body is used as individual companies do not want to be seen directly arguing about the matter in question.  If the proposal is by one government and affects a second government then a similar argument is likely to be used.

Then politics takes over!

A report from the BBC on taxing “junk food” can be found here and The Lancet here.