"Any businesses who think that they can carry on dodging that fair share or that they can keep on selling to the UK and setting up ever-more complex tax arrangements abroad to squeeze their tax bill right down. Well, they need to wake up and smell the coffee because the public who buy from them have had enough."
And now David Gauke, Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, writing in City a.m. last week:
"We are delivering a bigger set of pro-business tax reforms than our global competitors or predecessors ever managed.
. . .
In three years, the UK has moved from being an also-ran to the most competitive regime in the world, overtaking Ireland, the Netherlands and Switzerland.
. . .
Our approach is also radical by historical standards, even compared to the governments of Margaret Thatcher."
Now that's the issue of forked tongues out of the way. Gauke's article is summarised on twitter:
richard brooks â€@rbrooks45
Clear admission from gov that UK now corporate tax haven. "Most competitive in world, overtaking Ire, Neth, Switz" http://bit.ly/WyN8lR
Next, and perhaps more pertinently, Gauke is displaying economically illiteracy. First, tax rates have nothing whatsoever to do with 'competitiveness.' We have written exhaustively about this elsewhere (for instance, see "Popular Myths" here), and will publish more on this soon.
Second, UK Corporations are sitting on hundreds of billions of unused cash, which they are not spending or investing. Cutting corporation will do nothing except reduce the government's ability to spend on urgently needed items, in a country already parched by austerity (which many, such as Martin Wolf, argue is also in itself economically illiterate and boneheaded to boot.) On the folly of cutting corporation taxes, see this, from the LSE, here.
Cutting corporate taxes now is exactly, diametrically, the opposite of what this government should be doing.
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:
“Second, UK Corporations are sitting on hundreds of billions of unused cash, which they are not spending or investing.”
Is that (a) because they see a crash coming and see no need to lose money, (b) are waiting for the crash so they can buy assets at fire-sale prices or (c) both?
(d) the management has no idea what it is doing
That does suggest the foldout question: Why aren’t shareholders demanding the money be paid out? There have been rumblings about Apple’s huge piles of dosh, but why isn’t this more widespread?
I have no idea: maybe because the fund managers are complicit
My guess is they are lazy and just can’t be bothered with corporate governance. A lot of active managers would mostly rather just sell, and passive funds don’t want to spend money figuring out which way to vote.
Is there any good data on comprable privately owned companies? If this is a fund manager effect, it should be limited to listed companies.
(ps for ‘foldout’ read ‘followup’, I think my iTelephone can sense disloyalty.. )
e) because there is a demand-side recession: i.e. no one is buying. If companies spend their money to increase production, who will they sell the products to? Almost everyone is trying to save — and so the government should be spending.
i’d say (b)
I’d say (b) too