The Jersey Evening Post has reported:
JERSEY has been told that the UK government will not stick its neck out to protect the Island over its ‘zero-ten’ row with the EU.
The whole, print, version of the story makes it very clear that the UK is saying Jersey has no choice at all but comply with the EU decision on zero / ten and get rid of it. As I have been saying for ages and as Jersey Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf has been denying for days.
Time to smell the coffee Philip I think. And admit defeat.
Jersey got this wrong time and time again. If only you’d listened in 2005‚Ķand yes I am saying “told you so”, because I did.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I’m fairly new to your site so this zero / ten stuff didn’t mean anything to me till I looked at your posts and links. Tax avoiders using Jersey pay no tax but Jersey people do?
Tesco, HMV, ASDA and Sainsburys send CDs, DVDs etc to the Channel Islands then send them straight back to the UK, to online shoppers, to avoid paying VAT?
Thanks for your excellent site.
@Patrick Quinn
Right in both cases
You,ve stripped away all the padding. That’s what happens
Good, isn’t it?
Well if you are so right Richard then why is the Jersey Government and Jersey Finance Limited saying otherwise? Some of your posts do come across as anxious to ‘get one over Jersey’ sometimes. They have made it clear over the past week that they do not take advice from your organisation and the Treasury Minister seems unfussed about your continual stirring.
@Jamie
You may have noticed the UK government agree with me
Wait till Ozouf has to resign, I suggest. He may think he’s Canute, but he’s not
Because it’s clear – the UK will not take being messed around on this
Today there is supposed to be a response from Jersey Finance Limited on 0-10 in the JEP. But I have to tell you that what you are making out on this Blog is way off target to whats being reported here and thats by a number of sources. So somebody has got it wrong. Jersey Finance have said that 0-10 is not dead so thats a big contrast to what you are saying.
@Jamie
Ah, so! The UK, EU, Guernsey at al are all wrong and the world marches to Geoff Cook’s tune
Of course
Of course
Silly me
I forgot
He is the great omnipotent one
Please send him my apologies for forgetting and for believing that the UK and EU had any higher authority on this issue than he
If you were so right about everything Richard then why is nobody in Jersey panicking?
@Jamie
You’re not really asking me to answer that are you?
Shall we start with the word’s “short sighted” and let you fill in the rest?
Look, this is ending in a stalemate Richard but until we see 0-10 abolished in Jersey your comments cannot be taken seriously. Personally I think your views are more geared towards wishful thinking than reality but your accusing Jersey of likewise.
Jamie
As somebody based in Guernsey, I suspect that you should be panicking over there. The only reason you aren’t is because your leading politicians aren’t. Have they misread it ? Yes in my view. They are focusing only on the legal detail but do you honestly believe that if Jersey wins the legal battle it will win the war? For what it’s worth I think that Jersey might win the first legal battle but then what? Is the EU going to give up as a result? Of course not. The best that will happen is that Jersey might drag out the process for another couple of years, in the process pi**ing off both the UK and the EU. The sooner that Jersey and the Isle of Man join Guernsey in “moving on”, the better. I doubt very much that Guernsey is going to risk being dragged down by Jersey’s ill-advised stance.
Was it Kipling who said “if all about you are losing their heads then you clearly haven’t realised the gravity of the situation?”
I very rarely agree with Richard and I may actually be agreeing with him here for the wrong reasons, but Jersey seems to be taking some very poor decisions here. Time to look forward, not backwards.
The TJN has never liked Jersey’s Offshore Finance Industry, so lets not lose sight of what this organisation is all about! As for 0-10. Wait and see.
As I stand in Douglas working for a Jersey company, Rupert – you are absolutely on the button. Guernsey have it going in the right direction at least…
…but perhaps the UK need to spell it out to the IOM and Jersey – don’t assume that Island Governments have the wherewithall to understand what it is they’re being asked to do. Otherwise, I fear that 0/10 will just be replaced with some equally unsustainable workaround.
James
Many thanks.
According to the JEP today, Jersey’s argument is with the UK Treasury, not with the EU, which is a rather unusual situation (if accurate).
In the circumstances, I would have thought that a face to face meeting with the UK Treasury might be rather useful in clarifying the precise position so there is no doubt whatsoever. That must be better than all this current posturing and speculation which cannot possibly be beneficial.
Having said that, it does seem pretty clear what they have to do. There doesn’t seem to be too much scope for confusion although of course there are endless permutations of tax structures which could result.
Its quite possible that the UK will now fail to approve a new tax system which the EU finds acceptable, or vice versa…but its surely best to “manage” that situation with proper and open dialogue so that everyone can move forward.
@Rupert
More wishful thinking – or straightforward misinformation by Jersey
I have written to the JEP
Jersey and the IoM have got it wrong. It’s funny that Richard seems to be supporting Guernsey’s take on this which makes a change. Next week it should be back to type…I would have a wager that when the IMF relatively good views/ clean bill of health is published re Guernsey next week, Richard will have some scathing views of the IMF, FTAF, Guernsey et al!
It concerns me that the UK has historically not been direct enough in pointing out their concerns with the way the Island economies are run. This, perhaps, is indicative as to how bad the relationship has got between UK and Dependency.
For example, the termination of Health agreements inflict inflationary pressures on the Islands, and should therefore encourage responsible fiscal policy (NB: unstated goal). This means the intention is to force the introduction of tax systems on all BCDs which are competitively neutral. How many of the Island Governments are admitting fault for losing their Recprocal Health agreements?
The UK has a responsibility to the EU. The Lisbon Treaty is well worth a read – particularly the piece around economic cohesion (in simplistic terms, this means an equalisation of GDP/Capita across borders of similar cultural and economic norms – although not necessarily moving at the same rate of change…apologies, a thinly-veiled dig at the Eurozone…but that’s another conversation).
Neither economic cohesion nor its implications are generally understood phenomena, on or off the Islands – although one can say the UK policies of the Coalition are based on some pretty well thought through economics*. They are the principles of thermodynamics as applied to economics…the difficult end of rocket science, basically.
Having said that, it doesn’t take rocket science to figure what will happen to GDP/Capita in the Islands when (not if) the tax advantages are neutralised. If tax advantages have had impact on the general price levels (e.g. housing, minimum wage), then the Islands are looking at Ireland scenarios – although the economies will recover, this depends largely on what is left of the said Island that isn’t dependent on tax advantages…the problem being that highly profitable ‘avoidance’ business pushes out the substitutable business (i.e. on share resources such as labour and land, it simply out-prices it)…ultimately leaving nothing but tax avoiders on said BCD.
Hence the sooner a positive rate of tax is implemented, the better for the BCD.
Go Guernsey!
* I will probably live to regret that statement, not least for posting my support here – I shall expect a blasting from Richard!!!
@James
I’ll let you off! I don’t have to agree (or even disagree) with everything written here when it includes a clear argument – as you have
🙂