In the light of this morning's debate on tax increases I will quote this thread from my friend and Tax Justice UK colleague Robert Palmer (I on the advisory board of TJUK):
Note Robert's PS: we are on the same hymn sheet. Let's have tax increases for sure, but they must not be overall increases but any money raised now must be used to give cuts to those least well off in our society. That's what tax justice is about, and it makes complete economic sense right now.
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:
How does putting up corporation tax square with Brexit plan to make the UK more like Singapore? I assume low corporation tax is necessary to massage GDP figures and thus disguise the effects of Brexit on the productive economy. Bit like what happend in Ireland after GFC. I have doubts that this government will put up corporation tax.
I doubt it too…
This may be smoke and mirrors before austerity rolls in…
Tory Brexit policy is to subsidise British businesses. The EU is busy trying to replicate the WTO’s adjudication process (after Trump smashed it) to stop this!
I don’t think you’ll find that the bulk of UK business feels that it is being supported or subsidised by this government. On the contrary, with Brexit and the rest they are being hit hard.
Rather it’s specific sectors and individuals that have close links and fund the party. As ever that especially means the City and property.
I suspect that a lot of the urging to ‘get back to the office’ is driven by the commercial property sector and their financial backers who see the value of city centre property potentially collapsing. It’s not for everyone all the time, but both businesses and employees have seen the advantages of home working, not to mention the environmental gains.
i am trying to reconcile equalising capital gains tax, reducing pension tax benefits, raising corporation tax and taxing the rich more , being approved by almost two thirds of Conservative voters who attacked Labour for wanting to tax us all to death.
Yes – Tax the rich, they need to be taxed.
But, they are pushing the line ‘Higher tax is needed, to pay for Corona Virus’. They want people to believe that it is the rich billionaires who will dig deep, and saved the economy. Even now, Labours ex advisors are telling people ‘THE RICH WILL PAY FOR IT’.
And when things get back to normal… and the rich have dug deep, and everyone is happy, and holding the rich in so much high regard. THANK YOU RICH BILLIONARES, what would the country have done without your bazillions.
Then, when the dust settles, and we’re getting back to the way things were, the question the right wing press will ask is, why should the poor get anything? It was the poor who needed the furlough, it was the poor who was made redundant. it was the poor who was the burden on the countries finances, and the rich had to bail out.
And…we’ll be back to cuts for the poor, and tax benefits for the rich before you know it.
🙁
Ex Labour advisers are indeed saying this
James Meadway said we’d maxed out the credit card
Now we need the rich
You could not make it up
And the BBC reported it on radio news as the government planning a ‘tax raid’, once again promoting the idea that its our money that they are stealing from us.
The Taxpayers Alliance could have written the headline
It is staggering that such language is used by the BBC
You can only come to the conclusion that individuals like James Meadway and Jonathan Portes don’t understand Sectoral Balances Accounting after reading the following exchange:-
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/the-duel-covid-19-coronavirus-tax-rises-debt-modern-monetary-theory-mmt
In more simple words they don’t seem able to follow the flows of money both in and out of the economy. Jonathan Portes agonises about the deficit when people like him start to spend again as Covid-19 eases and Bill Mitchell simply says “Why Jonathan the government’s tax take will increase and its deficit reduce!” In other words no big deal the deficit is elastic to suit the circumstances of the economy!
I find Portes completely baffling
But remember there is no money in his preferred macro
I think after reading Steve Keen’s two articles which are based on his deployment of his Minsky modelling system which in turn is based in part on Wynne Godley’s Sectoral Balances Accounting model both Meadway and Portes ought to be asked what they disagree with in Keen’s model described in his two articles. Should they not understand it I’m sure they could reach out to speak to Steve Keen he does after all live in the same country!
https://www.patreon.com/posts/40545245
http://www.profstevekeen.com/2020/08/26/the-mathematical-model-of-modern-monetary-theory-2/
Should they refuse to rise to the challenge their positions can be seen for what they are political propaganda and not economic science. The Labour Party leadership should be made aware their stance has no attempt at neutrality, or independence of thought, backing it up by the attempt to model the money flows in the economy both of injection and retrojection as Keen has done.