Another few weeks in “tax land”
Where to start. So much has already happened in 2013.
Let’s start with the independence debate. I had finally finished my chapter on “the battle for a Scottish tax system” and then another devolution proposal appears and Ruth Davidson almost says something of interest on the tax and fiscal powers debate.
The latest devolution paper is called “devo more” and it is from The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). I know it is difficult to keep up. Again it starts from the premise of what is best for the UK not necessarily Scotland. Personal income tax, partial control of VAT, excise duties on alcohol and tobacco and air passenger duty would be devolved. Alan Trench, of the University of Edinburgh, who wrote the report, said it was “clear devolution must go further to meet popular demand and his plan minimises the adverse effects on other parts of the United Kingdom.” The IPPR report can be found here.
It is a pity that there was not more interest shown in putting together a serious proposal for tax and fiscal powers for the Scottish Parliament during Calman. Let’s not forgot that none of the “NO” parties has come close to arguing for the powers recommended for devolving in “devo plus”, let alone “devo max”, to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament. The Liberal Democrats have even gone backwards form what they proposed under the Steel Commission. See my earlier blog on this which can be found here.
Then we had Ruth Davidson’s speech which promised a lot and delivered almost nothing. Davidson promised no new tax or fiscal powers, no timetable for even considering the issue and no confirmation that she has moved on from saying that corporation tax and welfare powers should not be devolved. What did she say, or rather what did she hint at: “Sources close to Davidson confirmed that she will consider setting up a new commission to examine the devolution of more powers to the Scottish Parliament.” For more on Davidson’s speech see Alan Cochrane’s report in the Telegraph which can be found here.
The stance of the “NO” parties is a continuation of what I call the “Calman doctrine”. Do nothing unless under pressure, then if under pressure make a huge fuss about having someone look at the issue, take your time, offer as little as possible, exaggerate any problems, minimise or ignore any advantages and ensure HMRC and HM Treasury remain in control.
Time, and credibility, is fast running out for the “NO” campaign parties if they are to come up with a serious tax and fiscal proposal. The most recent “Scottish Social Attitudes Survey” was clear. Independence had 35% support and “devo max” 32%. That is a clear majority for almost all powers, including tax and welfare powers, to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament.
Now to the UK tax system. It seems that no-one is happy.
Two recent stories show why a Scottish tax system is needed. The first one relates to carbon capture. The article on this from the Herald can be found here. The second relates to air passenger duty. The article on this from the Scotsman can be found here.
Then there is the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee. It has called for the re-establishment of a single annual UK Budget, saying that the UK’s Autumn Statement has increasingly taken on the character of a second Budget resulting in uncertainty and costs for business and the economy. A report published by the Committee says: “The primacy of the Budget as the main focus of fiscal and economic policy making should be re-established”. More on this from the BBC news website can be found here.
The impressive chair of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, Margaret Hodge, has claimed that new tax laws are excessively influenced by major corporations and accountancy firms. Hodge has argued that working groups set up by the UK Government to discuss tax reforms were overly dominated by those with vested interests in reducing their tax contributions. More on this from the BBC news website can be found here.
Even business leaders are seemingly unhappy. The UK Government’s plans to reform tax laws forcing large companies to be more transparent regarding their tax affairs have been criticised by business leaders. The fear is that such laws would stifle the UK’s economic recovery as businesses would be reluctant to locate in the UK. More on this from the Guardian can be found here.
HMRC offers poor value for money, according to a report by the National Audit Office. The report claims that more than 20 million phone calls went unanswered last year, whilst callers who did get through were made to wait on average 282 seconds, up from 107 seconds last year, costing the public £33 million on call charges. More on this can be found here.
It has been claimed that the UK Government will have raised taxes 300 times and ordered 120 tax cuts by the end of their proposed term of government. More on this claim from the Telegraph can be found here. One of the more controversial UK tax proposals is termed a “bedroom tax”. More on this can be found here.
David Cameron has told the World Economic Forum conference in Davos that he will use the UK’s G8 presidency to launch a campaign against ‘unethical’ tax avoidance by multinational companies using ‘an army of clever accountants’. The accountancy profession whilst I am sure not unhappy at being termed clever, took umbrage with what Cameron said. More on this from the STEP journal can be found here. Interestingly Cameron again brings ethics into the tax debate. That said, does he intend to include the Crown Dependencies and the British overseas Territories in this campaign? If not, this is nothing but a press release.
Members of France’s socialist cabinet have denounced the famous actor Gerard Depardieu, who has shifted his residence just over the Belgian border in order to escape the Hollande government’s tax rises. Depardieu has retorted with an open letter to the newspapers, accusing the French Government of punishing success and talent, and offering to give up his passport. More on this can be found here.
Let’s end with some news on a Financial Transaction Tax. Eleven EU member states are to introduce a tax on financial transactions expected to generate £35bn in annual revenues. As a tax avoidance measure, the European Commission has amended the relevant directive to catch any transaction where either of the parties is domiciled in the tax area, or is trading on behalf of a client in the tax area. That will mean that this will also apply to some UK transactions. The European Commission is now expected to present proposals on the detail of this new taxation scheme which will need to be accepted by unanimous agreement of the participating states. More on this can be found here. Whether to introduce a Financial Transaction Tax is just one of the many tax decisions Scotland will be able to decide for itself if it decides to vote “YES” in 2014.
Have a great weekend and in particular to all those representing Scotland this weekend.